By Luseka Mwanzi
Introduction
In 2023, a Syrian refugee resettled in Belfast, Northern Ireland (NI), through the Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme and secured employment as a nurse — a milestone made possible through coordinated language support, credential recognition pathways, and community integration programs. This individual’s story illustrates what rights-based refugee policy can achieve. Northern Ireland’s Refugee Integration Strategy, which The Executive Office (TEO) published in May 2025, represents the region’s formal commitment to enabling such outcomes at scale. This article examines the strategy through the lens of international law, leading with the 1951 Refugee Convention and its integration obligations, before considering the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). The article further compares Northern Ireland’s approach with that of Scotland, Wales, and England, with a focus on gaps in accountability and implementation. It recommends strengthening the strategy through the establishment of measurable targets, increased civil society participation, and adequate resourcing.
The international legal framework for refugee integration imposes binding obligations on states that extend beyond border protection to require their active support in ensuring refugees’ full participation in society. The 1951 Refugee Convention forms the cornerstone of these obligations, granting refugees concrete socio-economic entitlements, including access to wage-earning employment, housing, public education, and social security, as well as requiring treatment at least equivalent to that of nationals. The ICCPR reinforces these integration commitments, guaranteeing equality before the law, freedom from discrimination, and freedom of movement for those lawfully present in a territory.
These protections establish a clear and enforceable baseline for state treatment of refugees throughout the integration process, creating positive obligations that require substantive commitment of resources and coordinated policy development rather than mere abstention from interference. Together, these instruments require states to go beyond legal recognition, actively resourcing and implementing policies that enable refugees to participate fully in a state’s cultural, economic, and social life.
From delay to reality: The development of Northern Ireland’s Refugee Integration Strategy
It is against this international legal backdrop that Northern Ireland’s efforts to develop a dedicated refugee integration strategy must be assessed. The region’s formal commitment to developing such a strategy dates back to 2005, when the need for coordinated support was first identified in the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister’s – The Executive Office (TEO) – Racial Equality Strategy 2005–2010, which recognized the distinct needs of refugees and asylum seekers within a broader racial equality framework. However, implementation was delayed for nearly two decades, during which time civil society organizations assumed primary responsibility for refugee support and integration initiatives. To partially fill the gap, the Racial Equality Strategy 2015–2025 provided an initial framework for government action while acknowledging the strong case for a separate refugee integration strategy to ensure a smooth transition from asylum seeker to refugee status and enable full potential realization of refugee integration. A consultation on the draft strategy ran from November 2021 to February 2022 and received input from refugee communities, civil society organizations, and statutory bodies.
The delay in the Refugee Integration Strategy’s implementation reflects broader challenges facing Northern Ireland’s devolved government, including multiple periods of suspension and political instability that hindered development of integration policy. These prolonged delays had consequences for refugees, leaving civil society organizations to fill critical gaps in employment support, language provision, and housing assistance that a formal strategy should have addressed, resulting in fragmented and inconsistent integration outcomes across the region.
The Refugee Integration Strategy was formally published in May 2025 by TEO. The strategy operates within the context of significant demographic changes in Northern Ireland’s refugee and asylum seeker population following recent resettlement and protection schemes. The Syrian Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Scheme, which began in 2015, resettled more than 1,800 Syrian refugees in Northern Ireland, providing valuable lessons regarding language support, cultural integration, and service accessibility outside Belfast. More recent arrivals include Afghans under various resettlement schemes, Ukrainians under temporary protection arrangements, and increasing numbers of asylum seekers from a range of backgrounds.
In 2024, the Refugee and Asylum Support and Integration Division (RASID) was established within TEO to coordinate support across government departments and statutory agencies, implementing the strategy’s commitments. RASID is the primary delivery mechanism for the strategy, working to translate its four outcomes of respect, safety, community integration, and economic participation into action across both operational and policy spheres. This includes implementing resettlement schemes and visa routes locally and coordinating workstreams such as asylum seeker support, the Ukrainian scheme, community sponsorship, and future resettlement programs. This institutional development reflects growing recognition that refugee integration requires a coordinated multi-agency approach rather than an ad hoc civil society response.
The content of the Strategy: strategic outcomes and framework
The Refugee Integration Strategy establishes four concrete outcomes: first, that refugees and asylum seekers are respected and their contributions valued; second, that they feel welcome and live safely, free from persecution and discrimination; third, that they are integrated into inclusive communities and can exercise their rights and responsibilities; and fourth, that they achieve economic participation and self-sufficiency through employment, education, and skills development. Each outcome is accompanied by indicative actions in the Outcomes Delivery Framework, though civil society organizations have criticized the strategy for its lack of specific, measurable targets and accountability mechanisms.
A distinctive feature of Northern Ireland’s approach is the commitment to “integration from Day One,” recognizing refugees and asylum seekers as valued members of society from arrival, rather than requiring waiting periods for access to services. This approach is evidence-based, with research demonstrating that early integration initiatives produce better outcomes for both individuals and host communities. This principle aligns with human rights frameworks that emphasize the inherent dignity and equal worth of all persons regardless of their legal status.
The strategy identifies key action areas such as English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) provision, free healthcare access, independent guardianship for separated children, destitution crisis funding, and employment pathways — all of which Law Centre Northern Ireland has commended, noting that, if implemented, they would bring significant improvements for people seeking sanctuary. However, these structures have attracted two principal criticisms:first, insufficient representation of affected communities and civil society in monitoring and oversight arrangements; and second, the absence of measurable targets and robust accountability mechanisms. TEO, responsible for the strategy’s implementation, has established the Strategic Planning Group to lead it, raising concerns about accountability and meaningful participation of affected populations, as required by human rights standards. Most critically, the Law Centre Northern Ireland has characterized the strategy as lacking any indicators or performance measurements, amounting to little more than wishful thinking, and falling well short of the measurable actions and accountability structures that the Refugee and Asylum Forum advocated for for more than two years.
Alignment of Northern Ireland’s Strategy with international law obligations
Northern Ireland’s Refugee Integration Strategy demonstrates partial alignment with international legal obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention, the ICCPR, the ICESCR, and related human rights instruments, while also exhibiting significant gaps in implementation mechanisms and accountability. The strategy’s “integration from Day One” commitment reflects the Refugee Convention’s principle that human rights protections apply regardless of legal status, consistent with ICCPR Article 2’s requirement to ensure rights to all persons within a state’s jurisdiction. Additionally, the strategy’s focus on combating discrimination aligns with ICCPR Article 26’s equality guarantee, while attention to education, healthcare, and economic participation maps onto ICESCR Articles 13, 12, and 6, respectively. However, the strategy’s aspirational character raises concerns about its compliance with ICESCR’s obligation to take steps toward the progressive realization of rights to the maximum of available resources. The absence of concrete resource commitments, measurable targets, and timelines from the strategy significantly undermines this requirement. The Law Centre Northern Ireland has found this absence renders the strategy non-compliant with human rights standards, a conclusion that should anchor concrete reform recommendations.
Additionally, the strategy’s governance fails to meet human rights standards for meaningful participation by affected populations. Academic literature has consistently highlighted how political instability and sectarian divisions in Northern Ireland hinder coherent refugee integration policy. Research demonstrates that consociationalism has hindered implementation of integration strategies, while attitudes toward refugees remain complex and influenced by sectarian identities. Law Centre Northern Ireland’s finding that the strategy excludes both civil society organizations and people seeking sanctuary reveals a fundamental accountability deficit. The Equality Commission similarly flagged weak monitoring arrangements and the absence of formal roles for the voluntary and community sector, which, despite their essential contributions, violates principles of participatory governance.
Beyond Northern Ireland: lessons from refugee integration across the United Kingdom
Scotland’s New Scots Refugee Integration Strategy represents the most developed and rigorously evaluated refugee integration model in the United Kingdom (UK), offering important lessons for Northern Ireland’s nascent strategy. The New Scots Refugee Integration Strategy emphasizes partnership among national and local government, civil society, and refugee communities, centering people with lived experience at its core. Priority areas include employment, health and well-being, education, and housing, grounded in the Ager and Strang conceptual framework, which emphasizes social bonds, language, and employment as pathways to belonging. In direct contrast to Northern Ireland’s 2025 strategy, Scotland’s framework includes specific indicators for measuring progress and transparent public reporting mechanisms. Northern Ireland may share Scotland’s devolved constraints, but it lacks its multi-stakeholder governance and civil society co-ownership — weaknesses that undermine the 2025 strategy. When comparing the two strategies, three takeaways emerge: one, refugee participation in design is essential; two, measurable indicators are necessary for accountability; and three, strategies must be developed iteratively with civil society, rather than produced as static documents.
Wales’s Nation of Sanctuary Plan
Wales’s Nation of Sanctuary Plan illustrates how a whole-of-community approach can complement formal integration frameworks, a useful comparator for Northern Ireland. Published in January 2019, it sets out five priorities: accessible public services, improved understanding of asylum issues, empowered communities, better mental health support, and support for young people. Wales’s strategy emphasizes dignity, respect, and equal access to services regardless of immigration status, including free healthcare and initiatives to combat hate crime. However, Wales faces constraints regarding geographic dispersal, with services concentrated in the capital, Cardiff — a challenge Northern Ireland similarly faces given the limited integration infrastructure outside of Belfast. Both jurisdictions demonstrate that whole-of-community approaches require deliberate investment in regional capacity if integration commitments are to be meaningfully delivered beyond major urban centers.
England’s approach to integration
England’s fragmented approach to refugee integration serves as a cautionary example of the consequences of the absence of a single rights-based integration strategy — consequences Northern Ireland must actively seek to avoid. Lacking a comprehensive strategy, England has instead developed policy through various initiatives, including the Integrated Communities Action Plan, the Refugee Employability Program, and the Refugee Transitions Outcome Fund. Strategic Migration Partnerships coordinate regional efforts, though this patchwork approach has produced inconsistent outcomes across dispersal areas. The 2025 White Paper compounds these challenges, extending the waiting period for Indefinite Leave to Remain from five to ten years and making support discretionary, which are developments that will directly constrain Northern Ireland’s capacity to deliver on its integration commitments. Taken together, the comparative picture demonstrates that Northern Ireland’s strategy must urgently address its accountability deficit to match the standards set by Scotland and Wales.
International Legal Framework and Assessment of Northern Ireland’s Strategy
#Having examined Scotland, Wales, and England’s approaches to refugee integration, Northern Ireland’s strategy can now be assessed against both regional comparators and international legal obligations. The international legal framework imposes layered obligations demanding active, resourced, and accountable integration policy. The ICCPR establishes enforceable civil and political baselines such as equality before the law, freedom from discrimination, and freedom of movement for those lawfully within a territory. The ICESCR complements these by addressing substantive conditions for human flourishing: rights to adequate living standards, health, education, and work. Critically, Article 2(1) of the ICESCR imposes positive obligations to take progressive steps toward full realization of these rights for all individuals within a state’s territory, requiring genuine resource commitment and coordinated policy development, not mere non-interference.
Northern Ireland’s strategy’s attention to education, healthcare access, and economic participation aligns with ICESCR Articles 13, 12, and 6, which protect rights to education, health, and work, respectively. However, the strategy’s primarily aspirational character raises serious questions about whether it satisfies the ICESCR obligation to take steps ‘to the maximum of its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of rights.’ The absence of concrete resource commitments, measurable targets, and implementation timelines fundamentally undermines the strategy’s capacity to fulfil these obligations and achieve meaningful compliance with the international legal framework it purports to reflect.
Law Centre Northern Ireland has concluded that the absence of measurable targets renders the strategy non-compliant with human rights standards, which is particularly significant given that legal compliance requires active and adequate funding; aspirational commitments unsupported by resources cannot discharge obligations under international law. This conclusion should therefore form the basis of concrete recommendations for reform, ensuring that Northern Ireland’s strategy moves beyond stated intentions toward the substantive, accountable, and resourced implementation that international law demands.
Moving forward: ongoing challenges
The strategy’s implementation reflects a broader failure to embed international law’s positive obligations, which require active, resourced, and measurable steps — aspirational commitments are insufficient. Both the ICESCR and the Refugee Convention demand concrete action, not stated intentions. The Law Centre Northern Ireland characterizes the strategy as falling “well short of expectations,” lacking measurable actions, accountability structures, and monitoring mechanisms despite two years of advocacy by the Refugee and Asylum Forum. Unlike Scotland’s New Scots framework, Northern Ireland’s strategy provides insufficient detail on resources, timelines, or responsibilities. Its internal Strategic Planning Group suggests civil society concerns were not addressed, therefore perpetuating marginalization and directly contravening the ICESCR’s progressive realization obligation.
The strategy’s implementation faces practical challenges including chronic underfunding of support services, insufficient language provision, gaps in mental health support, and barriers to employment recognition. Northern Ireland’s relatively small and dispersed refugee population creates difficulties achieving economies of scale for specialized services, particularly in areas outside Belfast where there is limited ethnic diversity and support infrastructure. The UK Parliament’s Northern Ireland Affairs Committee highlighted these challenges following its inquiry that began in April 2021 into minority ethnic communities and the report of March 9, 2022, noting that services for refugees outside Belfast were “patchy” and that language support remained insufficient even years after resettlement. Reserved immigration powers further constrain the strategy. Westminster’s restrictive approach undermines integration by treating refugees as temporary rather than future citizens. These structural deficiencies collectively fail to meet Refugee Convention integration entitlements and must be addressed through the concluding recommendations.
Conclusion
Northern Ireland’s Refugee Integration Strategy is a belated but significant commitment to refugee participation. Its outcomes-based framework partially aligns with the Refugee Convention, the ICCPR, and the ICESCR. However, deficiencies in accountability, participation, and measurable commitments undermine its effectiveness. The broader context of UK migration policy presents fundamental challenges for integration efforts across all jurisdictions through policy incoherence between restrictive immigration enforcement and localized integration support. The UK Government’s emphasis on deterrence, restriction, and removal conflicts with integration principles of welcome, inclusion, and pathways to citizenship. Yet, international law establishes that states bear obligations to not merely refrain from returning refugees to danger, but to ensure their civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights through progressive implementation of support measures.
Northern Ireland’s strategy acknowledges these principles but must be strengthened through four concrete recommendations. These recommendations are not made in isolation. The Law Centre Northern Ireland, following sustained engagement with the Refugee and Asylum Forum, has similarly called for concrete targets, robust accountability mechanisms, and meaningful civil society involvement in strategy oversight. The following recommendations both echo and build upon those calls:
(1) The Executive Office should consider establishing measurable targets and timelines within the strategy’s outcomes framework;
(2) The Executive Office should consider creating an independent monitoring body with meaningful civil society and refugee community representation led by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission or a newly constituted oversight body, with support from the Equality Commission, refugee-led organizations, non-governmental organizations, academic institutions, and representatives of refugee and asylum seeker communities;
(3) The Executive Office and other relevant Departments should consider committing dedicated resources to ESOL provision, mental health support, and professional qualification recognition; and
(4) The Executive Office and Northern Ireland MPs should consider advocating at Westminster for immigration policies aligned with integration objectives rather than deterrence to fulfill obligations under international law and achieve the aspiration of Northern Ireland as a place where refugees and asylum seekers are truly welcomed and enabled to contribute fully to society.
Luseka Mwanzi is an LLM student at Ulster University School of Law and a member of the Migration Policy Clinic team at Ulster University Law Clinic.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author/s and do not necessarily reflect those of the Refugee Law Initiative. We welcome comments and contributions to this blog – please comment below and see here for contribution guidelines.