Claiming asylum for Palestinians: The case for re-inclusion under the 1951 Refugee Convention 

Palestinians within Palestine and across the diaspora are forced to constantly contend with laws and systems of differentiation, exclusion, expulsion and erasure. The international refugee protection system is no different. 

Palestinians claiming asylum are forced to face a system which differentiates them from other refugees and to mediate an administrative boundary of exclusion from, and inclusion to protection (almost like an an administrative checkpoint for Palestinians…).

As a legal advisor for Palestinians claiming asylum, it can be difficult to navigate this complex system. By exploring this, we will outline considerations you can make when advising Palestinians claiming asylum. 

The definition of a refugee can be found in Article 1A of the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951, as a person who:

“…owing to a well founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion is out of the country of their nationality and is unable or owning to such a fear, is unwilling to avail themself of the protection of that country…”

But then Article 1D of the 1951 Refugee Convention excludes certain people from applying for refugee status if they are receiving, or are eligible to receive, another form of international protection from organs or agencies of the UN other than UNHCR:

“This Convention shall not apply to persons who are at present receiving from organs or agencies of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees protection or assistance.

When such protection or assistance has ceased for any reason, without the position of such persons being definitively settled in accordance with the relevant resolutions adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, these persons shall ipso facto be entitled to the benefits of this Convention”.

As a result of this article some Palestinians are effectively excluded from refugee status if they are receiving assistance or protection from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (more widely known as UNRWA).  

UNRWA was established in 1949, shortly after the Nakba (catastrophe), in which more than 750,000 Palestinians were expelled or displaced from Palestine to enable the creation of the settler-colonial State of Israel. 

The agency has a humanitarian and development mandate to provide assistance and protection to Palestinians recognised and registered as refugees under international law (because not all Palestinians have been formally registered as refugees) “pending a just and lasting solution to their plight”. 

With no just or lasting solution to the plight of Palestinians in sight, such as the right to return, UNRWA has effectively been a means to manage the humanitarian conditions of Palestinians in displacement. 

This means that Palestinians registered with UNRWA are technically eligible for UNRWA’s protection and, therefore, excluded from refugee status under Article 1D. 

In addition, the 1951 Refugee Convention further separates Palestinians who are registered with UNRWA from Palestinians who are not registered with UNRWA. The latter group of people can be considered for refugee status under Article 1A. 

What we saw in our case work previously, is that a significant number of Palestinians who are registered with UNRWA were being excluded from refugee status grants under Article 1D when they claimed asylum.  Instead they were receiving humanitarian protection. However, based on our more recent experience working with clients who fall under Article 1D, it is clear that this does not have to be the case. 

Under Article 1D, Palestinians can be both excluded and re-included under the Refugee Convention for refugee protection. If Palestinians who are registered with UNRWA, or simply eligible for their support, can demonstrate that UNRWA’s protection or assistance has ceased for any reason, then they should automatically be entitled to refugee status under Article 1D of the Refugee Convention. This is because Palestinians are already recognised as refugees under international law.

The Home Office’s Policy Instructions on Article 1D affirms this:

“Article 1D is one of the exclusion clauses in the Refugee Convention, but its overall purpose is to ensure the continuing protection of Palestinian refugees until their position is settled in accordance with relevant United Nations General Assembly resolutions. For as long as they are receiving UNRWA protection, they are excluded from Convention refugee protection. Should that protection cease to be available, they become entitled to the protection of the Convention under Article 1D”.

We can turn to caselaw and the Home Office’s guidance for a better understanding of what the requirements of ‘cessation of assistance or protection’ means. 

For example, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) held that a Palestinian claiming asylum must prove they have actually received or are eligible to receive UNRWA’s protection or assistance and that protection or assistance has ceased. An example of this is where UNRWA is not currently in a position, for objective reasons or reasons concerning an individual’s particular circumstances, to provide living conditions in line with its mission.

In the context of Palestinian refugees seeking international protection the note on UNHCR’s Interpretation of Article 1D of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and Article 12(1)(a) of the EU Qualification Directive is relevant. It recognises that an applicant is unable to return or re-avail themselves of the protection or assistance of UNRWA if there are threats to their life, physical security or freedom, or other serious protection-related risks, or practice, legal and safety barriers to return. 

In 2026, most people are acutely aware of the situation in Gaza, with atrocities streamed directly onto our mobile phones. Therefore, there is no shortage of evidence of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, ongoing bombardments, ground invasions, repeated internal displacements, the destruction of the healthcare system, and critically low volumes of humanitarian aid in Gaza. In the context of genocide, UNRWA’s ability to provide ‘effective assistance or protection’ to Palestinians is clearly null.  

UNRWA’s situation reports provide extensive information about the situation on the ground, and their response, including Israel’s prohibition on UNRWA from bringing humanitarian personnel and aid into the Gaza Strip since March 2025, with food and shelter supplies for hundreds and thousands of people waiting outside of Gaza, for entry clearance from Israel as the occupying power.  

There is also no shortage of evidence of the catastrophic conditions throughout Palestine, including Israel’s prohibition or restrictions on UNRWA from providing protection and assistance to Palestinian refugees in Palestine. In October 2024, Israel passed legislation banning UNRWA from operating in the occupied territories. In January 2026, Israel unilaterally demolished UNRWA’s headquarters in East Jerusalem in January 2026,

From this it is clearly arguable that there has been a  ‘cessation of assistance or protection’ from UNRWA in many cases. As a result, it should be argued that Palestinians claiming asylum who are registered with UNRWA, or eligible for their assistance, are ipso facto entitled to the benefits of refugee status under Article 1D of the Refugee Convention. 

This being said, as a legal advisor, we should of course, also consider protection needs under Article 1A of the Refugee Convention in applications we prepare for Palestinians we are advising. This is namely persecution on the grounds of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. We should make   sure arguments are included under all relevant provisions. 

Arguably, the exclusion/inclusion mechanism of Article 1D is as yet another mechanism by which Palestinians are differentiated from others, and excluded from protection. However, the evidence of UNRWA’s cessation of assistance or protection is, unfortunately, overwhelming. Based on our experience with asylum cases as of recent, involving Palestinians registered with UNRWA, or eligible for their assistance, it is fundamental, that the argument for re-inclusion under the Refugee Convention for refugee protection is made.