A.  Factual Background

1  When World War II came to an end the international community was faced with an enormous problem of displaced persons and refugees (see also Population, Expulsion and Transfer). The suggestion to establish an intergovernmental organization to assist and protect was discussed during the San Francisco Conference establishing the United Nations (UN). Although the majority of the displaced persons could already be repatriated in 1945 (Repatriation), more than 1,500,000 individuals remained, requiring further action.

B.  Establishment

2  The Constitution of the IRO (‘IRO Constitution’) was adopted by the UN General Assembly (United Nations, General Assembly) in Resolution 6(I) of 15 December 1946, to replace the Inter-Governmental Committee for Refugees (‘IGCR’; established in 1938 to help refugees from Germany and Austria) and the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA). The IRO was established as a UN specialized agency (United Nations, Specialized Agencies) and its Constitution should enter into force with the signature or accession of 15 State[s]. Awaiting the entry into force of the IRO, the UN General Assembly established the Preparatory Commission for the International Refugee Organization (‘PCIRO’), the activities of which started on 31 January 1947. The IRO Constitution entered into force on 20 August 1948.

3  Only 18 States became full members of the organization: Australia, Belgium, Canada, the Republic of China, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, France, Guatemala, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United States of America (‘US’) and Venezuela.

4  The controversies between Eastern and Western States on issues related to displaced persons and refugees had begun already within the UNRRA Council and were accentuated when drafting the IRO Constitution. The Eastern Bloc (see also Warsaw Treaty Organization) considered that individual concerns should not be taken into account, and that all persons displaced during the war should be repatriated. The Western States, on the other hand, were of the opinion that individual interest must be considered and that repatriation with a few exceptions should only take place on a voluntary basis. It became impossible to find a compromise, and the resolution whereby the IRO was established was adopted by 30 votes in favour, 5 against, and as many as 18 abstentions. From the outset it was decided that the activities of the organization should be of a temporary nature. However, there was no time limit in the IRO Constitution.

C.  Functions

5  The IRO was responsible for care and maintenance of persons under its mandate. In that respect the organization differed from the pre-war refugee organizations, whose task was mainly to co-ordinate international co-operation, to provide a satisfactory legal status, and to issue travel documents (Refugees, League of Nations Offices; Passports). The term ‘refugee’ applied to particular situations, such as the turmoil following the Russian revolution, and was based on nationality. The pre-war organizations seldom provided assistance. Being responsible for care and maintenance of persons it became of vital importance to the IRO to decide whether or not a person was of the concern of the organization. As a consequence the IRO Constitution lay down a detailed definition of any person, being of concern to the IRO (Annex I). It became necessary to establish a particular eligibility procedure, in which it was determined if an applicant was entitled to IRO protection and assistance. Eligibility boards were established in most field offices. There were also offices or control centres which received applications from refugees and which were located where they would afford refugees within the area as much opportunity as possible of applying for IRO assistance. An excluded applicant could appeal against the decision to the Review Board for Eligibility Appeals. When the number of appeal cases accumulated and made it impossible for the board to decide all cases, zonal review commissions were established. By the adoption of the IRO Constitution the term ‘refugee’ became individualized.

6  The term ‘displaced person’ applied to a person who had been deported from, or had been obliged to leave his or her country of nationality or country of former habitual residence (country of origin; see also Forced Population Transfer) as a result of the actions of the National Socialist (see also National Socialism and International Law) or Fascist regimes or of regimes which took part on their side in World War II, or of the quisling or similar regimes which assisted them against the Allied Powers.

7  The term ‘refugee’, as defined in the IRO Constitution, was divided into four paragraphs.

8  The first paragraph applied to persons, outside their country of origin, and who were victims of the National Socialist or Fascist regimes or of the other enemy regimes, Spanish Republicans, and other victims of the Falangist regimes as well as persons who were considered as refugees before the outbreak of World War II for reasons of race, religion, nationality, or public opinion (see also Racial and Religious Discrimination; Religion or Belief, Freedom of, International Protection).

9  The second paragraph applied to persons, who could not be classified as displaced persons, and who were outside their country of origin, and who, as a result of events subsequent to the outbreak of World War II were unable or unwilling to avail themselves of the protection of the governments of their countries of nationality. Accordingly, the term refugee also applied to persons who had left their country of origin after World War II.

10  The third paragraph applied to persons who, having resided in Germany or Austria, and being of Jewish origin or foreigners or stateless persons, and who were victims of National Socialist persecution, were in one of those countries as a result of enemy action or of war circumstances, provided they had not firmly resettled therein (see also Anti-Semitism). The third paragraph meant an exception to the principle that a refugee must be outside the country of origin.

11  The fourth paragraph applied to unaccompanied children who were war orphans or whose parents had disappeared and who were outside their country of origin.

12  Refugees and displaced persons could only be the concern of the IRO if they could be repatriated or if they had expressed ‘valid objections’ (Annex I Part I Sec. C IRO Constitution) to returning to their country of origin. Valid objections included persecution or fear of persecution, because of race, religion, nationality, or political opinion, provided their opinions were not contrary with the principles of the UN. Objections of a political nature could also be valid provided the IRO considered them to be valid. The criterion ‘valid objections’ was more lenient for victims of the National Socialist or Fascist regimes and pre-war refugees: they could be the concern of the IRO, provided they could invoke compelling family reasons arising out of previous persecution, or compelling reasons of infirmity or illness. The objections had to be expressed definitely and after receiving full knowledge of the facts, including adequate information from the government of the country of origin.

13  If an applicant invoked valid objections the IRO seems not to have distinguished between those who were displaced persons and those who were considered to be refugees. In practice the term displaced persons was of relevance only in such cases, when the person voluntarily wanted to be repatriated.

14  Refugees and displaced persons could cease to be the concern of the IRO, for instance, when they had returned to their country of origin, or when they had acquired a new nationality. They also ceased to be of concern when they had unreasonably refused to accept the proposals of the organization or when they were making no substantial effort towards earning their living, if it were possible for them to do so.

15  Persons could also be excluded from being the concern of the IRO. Most important was that war criminals (War crimes), quislings, and traitors should be excluded. The exclusion clause also applied to a person who had assisted the enemy in persecuting the civilian population of countries which had become members of the UN, or who had voluntarily assisted the enemy forces since the outbreak of World War II in their operations against the Allied Powers. Ordinary criminals, who were extraditable by treaty (treaties; extradition), were excluded. Another excluded category was persons of German ethnic origin, who had left or moved to Germany during or after the war or might be transferred to that country (Volksdeutsche).

16  Eligibility was to be determined in accordance with the IRO Constitution. As time passed several policy changes took place, partly due to the escalation of the Cold War (1947–91). The jurisprudence of the Review Board for Eligibility Appeals evolved in line with the IRO’s policy of greater leniency deciding eligibility. Most important was a more tolerant view with respect to persons who had assisted the enemy forces. The previous policy meant that solely the action of the individual was decisive and could lead to exclusion, while later, taking into account the increased knowledge of the background and motives for various national groups, the moral intention of the individual was taken into account. It was in particular applicants from the Baltic States that were favoured by this revision of policy.

17  In the first place the IRO should encourage the early return of displaced persons to their country of nationality. With respect to persons for whom repatriation was impossible, the IRO should facilitate their re-establishment in countries of temporary residence, or find countries willing to admit refugees for resettlement.

D.  Organization and Finances

18  The structure of the IRO was similar to other specialized agencies: the General Council, comprising one representative from each Member State, which was the ultimate policy-making body; the Executive Committee, comprising representatives from nine countries, which should give effect to the policies of the General Council and should adopt policy decisions of an emergency nature between sessions of the General Council; and a Secretariat, headed by a Director-General, appointed by the General Council.

19  Under regulations made by the General Council the Director-General appointed the staff. The IRO headquarters were based in Geneva. Offices and missions were established in 22 countries. At the height of its operations the total number of staff amounted to some 5,600 employees.

20  The 18 Member States contributed to the administrative, operational, and large-scale resettlement expenditures of the IRO. Over the period of its existence these States contributed almost US$400 million, with additional income of US$40 million from, inter alia, UNRRA and IGCR funds.

E.  Activities

21  The aim of the IRO was assistance and protection first and foremost of more than 1,500,000 persons displaced after World War II, who were not yet repatriated or resettled. Most of them were lodged in refugee camps in the three Western zones of Germany (Germany, Occupation after World War II ; Germany, Legal Status after World War II), in Austria, Italy, and the Middle East. Those living out-of-camp in other areas, mainly countries of Western Europe, could receive cash assistance. The IRO provided care and maintenance in the camps. Housing was to meet minimum standards. Adequate food and clothing, medical care, and education opportunities to children and vocational training were essential. Counselling and adaptation to a new life became important elements of the IRO’s activities.

22  A function of the IRO was the re-establishment of refugees in countries of temporary residence, so-called local settlement. Many refugees remained in the country of residence and never called upon the assistance of the IRO and were able to adapt themselves to conditions as they found them. Others were impatient and began to make their way into the local economy of the country in which they happened to live. Accordingly, the responsibilities of the IRO for local resettlement were left with refugees with limited opportunities for resettlement, altogether amounting to some 65,000 persons.

23  Resettlement, ie the transfer of refugees to third States, became the most important function of the organization. In total IRO found resettlement opportunities for about 1 million persons, most of them resettled in overseas countries (US, Australia, and Canada).

24  Particular problems concerned so-called hard core cases. There were refugees who for reasons of old age or ill health, would require continuing institutional care. There were also families, who because they did not possess the qualifications which would have made them acceptable to countries of immigration, were considered to have only limited opportunities for resettlement. The situation for many of those refugees remained unsolved when the IRO was dissolved, and became the responsibility of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (Refugees, United Nations High Commissioner for [UNHCR]).

25  A most important part of the IRO’s tasks was legal and political protection. In the first place that meant responsibility concerning the determination of eligibility. The IRO also became entitled, frequently through bilateral agreements, to protect refugees—an entitlement which otherwise pertains to nations with regard to their nationals. In this context the IRO fulfilled a quasi-consular function (Consular Functions). The refugees should be protected from discrimination, and, as much as possible, granted economic and social rights and freedom of movement. The IRO could intervene on behalf of refugees who for some reason were detained, and they could be assisted with respect to access to the labour market (see also Work, Right to, International Protection). The IRO assisted refugees in national asylum procedures (Asylum, Territorial; Asylum, Diplomatic). The activities of the IRO were gradually wound up in 1951.

F.  Assessment

26  The activities of the IRO fell victim to the Cold War. Only 18 States became full members. Several States which voted in favour of establishing the IRO never signed the IRO Constitution. On the other hand, a few States which had abstained became members or accepted refugees for resettlement. The IRO never became the universal organization that had been hoped for. Accordingly, in 1950 it was decided to replace the IRO with another temporary organ, the UNHCR, which was established as a subsidiary body of the UN General Assembly.

27  The IRO had great significance for the UNHCR. Not only did the international community take more active measures to solve the world’s refugee problem by providing material assistance and legal protection, inter alia, by establishing missions in countries where there were refugees. The definition of the term ‘refugee’, as laid down in the Statute of the Office of the UNHCR (UNGA Res 428 [V] [14 December 1950] GAOR 5th Sess Supp 20, 46 Annex) and in the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees ([signed 28 July 1951, entered into force 22 April 1954] 189 UNTS 150) was strongly influenced by the practice that was evolved by IRO eligibility boards.