The DOI matches its Crossref record.
(Some) refugees welcome: When is differentiating between refugees unlawful discrimination?
Open accessAbstract
Europe’s extraordinary response to those fleeing the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 has prompted many criticisms of Europe’s treatment of other refugees, and indeed people of colour and members of ethnic minorities fleeing Ukraine. While stark, this differentiated response in not unusual: The global refugee regime treats different refugees differently, as a matter of course. Refugees often encounter racialized migration controls, and systems which privilege some refugees over others. The article seeks to clarify when these practices violate the international legal prohibitions on discrimination on grounds of race and nationality. To do so, it focuses on race discrimination in general international human rights law, clarifying the interaction between general human rights principles and instruments, and the specialist instrument in the field, the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination. We identify how differences in treatment on grounds of nationality may engage the prohibition on race discrimination both directly (in particular when nationality equates to national origin) or indirectly. Concerning nationality discrimination, the article focuses in particular on the added value of Article 3 of the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees, which obliges states to ‘apply the provisions of this Convention to refugees without discrimination as to race, religion or country of origin.’ We examine Article 3 both within the overall scheme of the Refugee Convention and as a source to guide interpretation of international human rights norms.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Starting all the way from the EUlegislation perspective, a range of authors pinpoint how a shift in migration rhetoric and, specifically, the activation of the Temporary Protection Directive (TPD) highlight a peculiarity in how EU addresses different 'refugee crises' (Bosse 2022; Bottero 2022; Costello and Foster 2022; de Sousa 2022).”
From Ukrainian Refugees’ Differentiated Treatment: A Critical and Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as Costello and Foster 2022
Citations
Cited by
Ukrainian Refugees’ Differentiated Treatment: A Critical and Systematic Review
Mickelsson, T. B. (2025) · Global Networks · doi:10.1111/glob.12502 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- Costello, C., & Foster, M.
- Affiliations
- Hertie School (DE)
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Costello, Cathryn
- Venue
- International Journal of Discrimination and the Law
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2022-08-24
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 244-280
- ISSN
- 1358-2291 (ISSN-L)
- 2047-9468
- OpenAlex
- W4293013078
- Cited by
- 64
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 9.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- International Journal of Discrimination and the Law (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- OPUS 4 (Zuse Institute Berlin) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- H2020 European Research Council (716968)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Migration, Racism, and Human Rights
- Social Sciences › Law › Discrimination and Equality Law
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Law and Human Rights
- Keywords
- racial discrimination, nationality discrimination, International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 1951 Refugee Convention, Ukrainian refugees, indirect discrimination, international human rights law, ethnic minorities
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.