The Responsibility dilemma: UNHCR's camp management and Refugee Status Determination in the light of international Human Rights Law

In the context of the massive refugee flows that followed the second world war’s exodus, the United Nation Hight Commissioner for Refugee (UNHCR) has been created by the General Assembly with the aim of assisting states in the respect of the parameters set out by the 1951 Convention of Geneva and of researching durable solution for refugees and IDPs. Accordingly with the evolution of role that the Agency and other Non-state actors involved in the migration governance have been knowing in the last decades, the lack of a uniform and coherent legislation which can properly regulate the responsibility sharing is generating a wide debate on the need of introducing direct obligations and accountability systems for all the actors involved. In particular, the UNHCR has become the primary entity capable of dealing with camp administration and refugee status definition’s procedures in many of the host countries which are considered as “unwilling” or “unable” to carry out a human right oriented migration policy. The research is aimed, in first place, in defining the consistency of the current mandate of the UNHCR, through a comparison between its Statute and its activities and analysing the position of Non-state actors in front of international human rights law; it examines which accountability systems are already on place and which international legal instrument can be used to assure a proper protection for refugees. Indeed,the role that these actors play in the safeguarding of asylum seekers’ life implies the necessity to define high standards of transparency and efficiency in the carrying out of the tasks, as well as the availability of huge qualified staff resources. The elaborate analyses in a comparative manner numerous field researches in order to have a broader view of the critical issues that are encountered in the performance of different activities by the UN offices, trying to underline also the positive efforts put by the Agency in reforms and examples of good practices. Indeed, the emergence of cases of errors and violations impacts negatively on the credibility of the organization and on its ability to press the governments of the states to respect their commitments towards the refugee communities