By Gillian Kane and Laura Hyde
Introduction
In the UK, the law and policy focus on migration and asylum is primarily centred within a central government context. This is unsurprising, given that immigration control is a reserved matter, outside the competence of the devolved governments in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. It is true that much of the refugee experience in the UK is shaped by law and policy set in place at Westminster and Whitehall. Yet, as the articles in this series have demonstrated, there is much that the devolved institutions can and should do to ensure meaningful and effective realisation of refugee rights, particularly in the period after an international protection claim is granted. As such, it is essential that research, analysis, and advocacy, does not overlook the law, policy, and practice of devolved institutions.
The pieces in this series have shown just how instrumental action – or inaction – at the devolved level can be for refugees in Northern Ireland. The pieces emerged from a pilot policy clinic project within the Ulster University Law Clinic. The Northern Ireland focus allowed students to reflect on what is required in a local context to ensure compliance with international law, and to make a meaningful policy-focused contribution that is of relevance in the local context within which the university is situated.
In this final article, we outline two core themes that have emerged from the articles: (1) the need to centre the Northern Ireland institutions as duty bearers of international refugee and human rights law, and (2) the necessity of contextual, localised solutions for meaningful realisation of refugee rights. Then, we turn to reflect on what this project has revealed about the educational and civic role of a university migration policy clinic operating in a devolved region, before concluding with a call for similar projects that can provide valuable policy-relevant research in other localised settings.
Centring the Northern Ireland institutions as duty bearers under international law
The rights of refugees in the UK are protected in international law, most notably under the 1951 Refugee Convention, the ICCPR, ICESCR, and the ECHR. At the core of the refugee protection framework is the prohibition of refoulement. Beyond this, there are a range of substantive and procedural rights – and corresponding state obligations – relating to housing, education, and social security, to name a few.
From the perspective of international law, it is the state, as a unitary actor, that bears responsibility. Article 2 of The International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on State Responsibility states that an ‘internationally wrongful act’ is one that is ‘attributable to the State under international law’ and that ‘constitutes a breach of an international obligation’. But when is conduct to be considered as an act of a state? Article 4 of the Draft Articles notes that:
‘[t]he conduct of any State organ shall be considered an act of that State under international law whether the organ exercises legislative, executive, judicial or any other functions, whatever position it holds in the organization of the State, and whatever its character as an organ of the central Government or of a territorial unit of the State.’
Article 5 goes on to clarify that:
‘The conduct of a person or entity which is not an organ of the State under article 4 but which is empowered by the law of that State to exercise elements of the governmental authority shall be considered an act of the State under international law.’
Against this backdrop, it becomes apparent that the acts – or omissions – of the Northern Ireland Assembly, Executive, Government Departments and key public bodies, are attributable to the state, and as such engage obligations under international law. Simply put, these local institutions and actors are duty bearers with obligations to respect, protect, and fulfil refugee rights in Northern Ireland.
As such, it is of utmost importance that in a multi-layered territorial constitutional setting such as the UK, any assessment of compliance with international law focuses on the devolved level just as much as the central government level.
The articles in this series do just that, shifting the gaze to the regional, and highlighting where the responsibilities of key Northern Ireland actors are engaged in the realm of refugee protection. The series authors point to a range of substantive rights protections that the Northern Ireland institutions are required to respect, protect, and fulfil. This ranges from equality, education, health and social security provisions in international refugee and human rights law, to data collection obligations in international refugee law. In so doing, the authors demonstrate that despite many aspects of immigration law and policy falling outside the competence of the Northern Ireland institutions, there are range of devolved policy areas that have the potential to impact upon the experience of refugees in Northern Ireland, and as such, which trigger key international obligations. In other words, the articles show that ensuring adequate rights protections for refugees in the region is not merely an appropriate humanitarian response, it is also required by a range of legally binding obligations within international law.
Rights realisation: the need for contextual, localised solutions
Across the series, the articles analyse key refugee and human rights law obligations against the backdrop of Northern Ireland’s unique context. Mwanzi’s analysis of the Northern Ireland Refugee Integration Strategy shows promise that is constrained by a range of challenges, including the absence of clear, measurable baselines upon which to chart progress. Further, the articles on housing, education, and social security speak to a number of additional challenges, including inadequate training, legislative barriers, lack of access to information, and financial constraints.
When it comes to the substance of the recommendations, while many of the proposed actions would certainly have value in any context, the need for a contextual, localised approach becomes even more apparent. In the first article in the series, Donnelly begins by setting out Northern Ireland’s distinctiveness, highlighting the legacy of ethno-national conflict that still permeates many aspects of life in Northern Ireland today. Lippard and McNamee (2021) highlight that ‘identity politics related to [Northern Ireland] citizens’ religious and nationalist identity encouraged racist and sectarian disapproval of Syrian refugee resettlement.’ This means that the question of how the recommendations are implemented requires additional thought and care. For example, any support for housing must take into account the fact that social housing in some parts of Northern Ireland – particularly parts of Belfast – remains segregated along sectarian lines. Further, many schools are also ‘segregated along religious operating with de facto parallel systems for Catholics and Protestants’. This context highlights how implementation of recommendations on housing and education, for example, must be undertaken in a context where sectarian divides still permeate these spaces. As such, integration in divided contexts will require additional thought and care, with a localised approach that takes account of the distinct setting in which refugees are hosted.
Flowing from this unique context, is what Donnelly referred to in the first article as a ‘governance landscape unlike anywhere in the UK’. This speaks to the distinctiveness of the devolution arrangements in Northern Ireland: the Northern Ireland Executive is a mandatory power sharing coalition which must navigate the legacy of ethno-national conflict. The legacy has meant that Northern Ireland’s context is underpinned by strong rights protections for all, through the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement. Yet, the challenges of power sharing, and chronic funding deficits present some distinct obstacles to meaningful support for refugees in the region. Ultimately, the Northern Ireland institutions also face the challenge of navigating effective realisation of refugee rights in the devolved sphere against the backdrop of significant fiscal shortfalls and a complex power sharing governance structure.
These challenges may present significant obstacles to progress in Northern Ireland. Yet they are not insurmountable. Yet, they reveal the need for policy dialogue that can contextualise international obligations in a local setting, so that recommendations and strategic actions are not detached from the socio-political realities in which refugee rights realisation must be delivered. In this regard, a university policy clinic may play an important civic role, as outlined below.
Reflections on the role of a local university policy clinic in the migration space
The articles in this series emerged as the outputs of a pilot migration policy clinic project in Ulster University Law Clinic, which sits within Ulster University School of Law. With input from the Refugee Law Initiative (RLI) we decided to focus the research on refugee protection, concentrating specifically on Northern Ireland. In this section, we reflect on the value of policy clinics for students, higher education institutions, and local stakeholders.
Policy clinics have emerged as an increasingly prominent pedagogical approach within UK clinical legal education. Such clinics demonstrate the capacity of clinical legal education to extend beyond the provision of legal services to individual clients by engaging with law and policy reform. In doing so, policy clinics align closely with the foundational ethos of clinical legal education, in which, a commitment to social justice is a central organising principle. Policy clinics represent a natural evolution of the clinical model while remaining firmly grounded in its core social justice mission.
In our pilot year, the migration policy clinic has illustrated how students can engage with complex policy questions while developing practical legal skills and contributing to important debates about refugee protection and integration in a local context. The policy clinic has provided a teaching model that combines practical legal skills while also developing citizenship and civic engagement. Research is at the heart of the policy clinic mode. The research in our pilot was designed to – and did – contribute to real policy conversations. The resulting recommendations are practical, evidence-based and directed towards policymakers and public bodies. This process developed advanced legal research skills while demonstrating how academic expertise can support informed public decision-making.
One of the most significant contributions of the policy clinic is the development of citizenship skills. Students were encouraged to view law not simply as a body of rules, but as a mechanism through which society can address injustice and improve public policy. This aligns with the core purposes of law clinics more generally. Further, students learned a range of additional skills, including how to communicate legal research to non-academic audiences, formulate evidence-based recommendations, and appreciate the responsibilities of lawyers in promoting the public interest. These are skills that cannot easily be replicated through classroom teaching alone.
The clinic also provided students with a deeper understanding of immigration and refugee law within Northern Ireland’s unique constitutional framework. Appreciating the distinction between reserved and devolved matters was essential for understanding the focus of the project and resulting recommendations. The policy clinic enabled students to move beyond abstract constitutional principles to examine how devolved institutions can and should exercise their powers to ensure meaningful realisation of refugee rights, even where immigration law and policy itself is not devolved.
The pilot policy clinic has proven successful in a number of respects, most notably in the high quality of the research and policy analysis produced by the participating students. It also created an important bridge between the university and key stakeholders both within and beyond Northern Ireland. By engaging with organisations – such as the Refugee Law Initiative, UNHCR, civil society organisations and other local stakeholders – from the outset, students became active participants in policy dialogue rather than passive observers. Further, by hosting a dissemination event at the end of the semester, a range of local stakeholders, including elected representatives, engaged with the recommendations and have been in contact to request further engagement from the clinicians.
The pilot also provided valuable insights that will inform future iterations of the clinic. First, it highlighted the importance of sustained academic supervision to ensure that students remain engaged, receive appropriate guidance, and produce work of a consistently high standard. Second, it demonstrated the significant time required to undertake rigorous policy research, underscoring the need to schedule the clinic appropriately within the academic calendar to allow sufficient time for research, drafting, and revision. Overall, the pilot has established a strong foundation upon which the policy clinic can be further developed and expanded in future years.
Conclusion
Centring an international law perspective in local policy discussions on refugee integration, housing, education and social security helps ensure that these local developments are rooted in binding international obligations. The articles in this series demonstrate that the effective realisation of internationally guaranteed refugee rights in Northern Ireland extends to devolved law and policy areas. The research undertaken through the pilot migration policy clinic students illustrates that devolved government has both the capacity and the responsibility to advance refugee protection by ensuring that domestic law, policy and practice give meaningful effect to the United Kingdom’s international legal obligations.
At the same time, this project demonstrates the significant contribution that university law clinics can make to policy development and public discourse and the educational potential of policy clinics as an important complement to traditional client-facing clinical legal education. They enable students to appreciate the relationship between law, policy and lived experience, and to understand how legal scholarship can contribute to meaningful reform.
Looking ahead, there is considerable scope to deepen engagement with refugee communities, policymakers and civil society organisations, expand the range of policy issues considered, and strengthen the impact of the clinic’s research within Northern Ireland and beyond. As universities increasingly seek to combine research excellence with civic engagement, policy clinics offer a compelling model for embedding experiential learning while contributing to evidence-informed policymaking, as the articles in this series exemplify.
Dr Gillian Kane is a Lecturer in the School of Law at at Ulster University, where she teaches International Migration Law and Public Law. Gillian’s work focuses on the intersections between various international legal frameworks governing migration and trafficking. Gillian is also co-chair of the Human Trafficking Research Network, a Senior Research Associate at the Refugee Law Initiative, and a trustee at Chab Dai UK.
Laura Hyde is Law Clinic Manager, Course Director, and Lecturer in the School of Law at Ulster University. A qualified solicitor and Fellow of the Higher Education Academy, she leads the Ulster University Law Clinic, delivering clinical legal education while overseeing the provision of free legal advice to the community.
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.