Refugee Protection in Non-Signatory States: Bangladesh, the Rohingya, and the Limits of Consent-Based International Law

Most of the world’s refugees are hosted by developing States, many of which are not parties to the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol. This article examines how refugee protection operates in such non-signatory contexts, focusing on Bangladesh as a principal host State for the Rohingya population. It addresses a central legal problem: the absence of formal Convention obligations and the resulting implications for the scope and stability of refugee rights. The study pursues three objectives. First, it explores the legal foundations of refugee protection in States outside the Convention regime. Second, it analyses Bangladesh’s obligations under international human rights law and customary international law. Third, it evaluates the structural limitations of contemporary refugee governance, particularly its reliance on State consent and uneven global burden-sharing. Adopting a doctrinal and analytical methodology, the article argues that refugee protection in non-signatory States does not exist in a legal vacuum. Instead, it is sustained through human rights treaties, customary norms such as non-refoulement, and cooperation with international institutions. However, this framework provides only a minimum standard of protection and lacks mechanisms to ensure consistent, rights-based integration. The findings reveal structural weaknesses in the international refugee system that extend beyond Bangladesh and reflect broader challenges within global refugee governance.