Statement of the Problem

Historically, refugee travel documents—most notably the Nansen Passport—served not only as proof of identity but as critical instruments of international protection and access to durable solutions. By enabling lawful cross-border movement, these documents allowed refugees to pursue education, employment, resettlement, and family reunification, thereby transforming displacement into opportunity. This historical function is now replicated in international refugee law through the Convention Travel Document (CTD) established under Article 28 of the 1951 Refugee Convention.

However, in the contemporary context of protracted conflicts and mass displacement, the effectiveness of CTDs has been significantly undermined by persistent legal and policy gaps in their issuance, recognition, and use. Ongoing conflicts in countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) have forced refugees to remain in host countries for extended periods, while international assistance—particularly from UNHCR—has become increasingly constrained due to chronic global funding shortages. As a result, host communities face growing socio-economic pressure, leading some States to adopt restrictive and deterrence-oriented refugee policies, including border closures, encampment, and forced returns.

In Tanzania, for example, the refusal to admit Congolese refugees fleeing violence in Uvira and Baraka in 2024 and late 2025, forced many to seek safety in overcrowded areas such as Rumonge in Burundi, exposing them to further insecurity and humanitarian strain. Malawi and Tanzania have similarly adopted restrictive refugee policies that limit mobility and access to documentation, increasing refugees’ vulnerability to arrest, detention, and criminalization for movement-related offences. In the DRC, refugees face extreme challenges in accessing CTDs due to prevailing insecurity, poor infrastructure, and the requirement to travel long distances—often to Kinshasa—to complete documentation processes. Burundi’s fragile economy further limits administrative capacity to support refugee documentation, while Libya’s non-recognition of the 1951 Refugee Convention leaves refugees without any formal asylum or CTD framework at all.

Despite these constraints, international and refugee-led initiatives have increasingly invested in education as a pathway to durable solutions. Programs such as Erasmus Mundus, the Mastercard Foundation Scholars Program, INUA Foundation in Tanzania, and the Refugee-Led Research Hub (RLRH) in Kenya aim to expand refugees’ access to higher education and global opportunities. Yet, these initiatives critically depend on refugees’ ability to obtain and use valid travel documents. In practice, many refugees are unable to take up fully funded scholarships, attend international conferences, or pursue academic mobility because they lack CTDs or because the CTDs they possess are not recognized by host States, embassies, or border authorities.

As a consequence of these legal and policy gaps, refugees often resort to dangerous and unlawful alternatives. Some return to their countries of origin to seek national passports, exposing themselves to grave risks—as illustrated by Congolese refugees trapped in Bukavu and Goma and forcibly recruited into armed groups such as M23. Others attempt to use borrowed or fraudulent national documents, leading to arrest, prolonged detention, or imprisonment, as documented in Malawi and Tanzania. In extreme cases, enforcement practices have resulted in fatal outcomes, such as the death of Mr. Enos Elias in Kigoma, Tanzania, at the hands of migration officers. Even refugees who possess valid CTDs face systemic discrimination, including visa refusals and non-recognition by embassies, as experienced by Mr. Fabrice Ndayizeye (denied a Turkish visa) and Mr. Mulindwa Jean-Marie (refused entry to Zambia despite holding a CTD).

These realities demonstrate that the problem is not merely the absence of refugee travel documents, but the failure of existing legal and policy frameworks to ensure their effective issuance, recognition, and usability. The resulting barriers deprive refugees of access to education, mobility, and other durable solutions, entrenching cycles of dependency, insecurity, and vulnerability. In the selected study countries—Malawi, Tanzania, the DRC, Burundi, and Libya—these challenges collectively undermine refugee protection regimes and perpetuate protracted displacement.

This study therefore addresses a critical gap by examining how legal and policy shortcomings surrounding Convention Travel Documents obstruct refugee protection and durable solutions, and how reforming CTD systems could restore mobility as a cornerstone of international refugee protection in contexts of prolonged displacement and limited humanitarian resources.

Background to the Study

Refugees’ ability to move safely across borders is an essential component of international protection and a prerequisite for achieving durable solutions such as resettlement, voluntary repatriation, local integration, education opportunities, and access to livelihoods. The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol obligate States to issue Convention Travel Documents (CTDs) to refugees lawfully staying in their territory to facilitate international travel and safeguard their rights. CTDs are intended to serve as secure, internationally recognized travel documents that enable refugees to travel for medical reasons, education, employment, family reunification, and participation in resettlement interviews or humanitarian corridors. However, despite these obligations, the issuance and effective use of CTDs remain inconsistent, inaccessible, and often hindered by significant legal, administrative, and policy constraints across many refugee-hosting countries.

Globally, refugees frequently encounter complex barriers in obtaining CTDs, including restrictive asylum policies, bureaucratic delays, prohibitive fees, limited government capacity, and a lack of harmonized regional practices. These gaps often compel refugees to resort to unsafe or irregular alternatives, including returning to their countries of origin to seek national passports or using fraudulent documents. Such actions directly undermine the protection guarantees of refugee status, expose individuals to severe security risks, and can amount to constructive refoulement. For example, Congolese refugees attempting to obtain national passports in Bukavu have faced harassment, extortion, and even forced recruitment by armed groups such as M23, illustrating the acute dangers associated with inadequate CTD systems.

In Africa, the challenge is particularly pronounced due to varying levels of State capacity, divergent national legal frameworks, and the complex security environments in which refugees reside. Many African States are signatories to the 1951 Convention, yet implementation of CTD obligations is inconsistent. Countries such as Tanzania and Malawi maintain restrictive asylum and encampment policies that limit refugees’ mobility and access to documentation. Other States, including Burundi and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), struggle with administrative weaknesses, poverty, or insecurity, resulting in extremely limited or centralized CTD services that refugees in remote areas cannot access. In Libya, the absence of a functioning asylum system altogether leaves refugees with no legal pathway to documentation or safe travel, forcing many into perilous journeys across the Mediterranean.

The consequences of these legal and policy gaps extend far beyond access to travel documents. When refugees lack CTDs, they are unable to pursue academic scholarships abroad, cannot travel for essential medical treatment, and face obstacles in family reunification processes. Many miss opportunities for resettlement because they cannot legally travel to interview locations or transit countries. Others risk detention, deportation, or exploitation when they attempt to move without proper documentation. In countries such as Tanzania, refugees caught using borrowed or false documents face long-term detention, further compounding their vulnerability and blocking any pathway to durable solutions.

In this context, examining the legal, administrative, and practical gaps that affect CTD issuance and recognition is critical for understanding how mobility restrictions undermine refugee protection frameworks. This study is motivated by the need to assess how the shortcomings of CTD systems in different African countries—specifically the DRC, Burundi, Tanzania, Malawi, and Libya—shape refugees’ protection risks and limit their access to durable solutions. These countries have been selected deliberately because they represent diverse yet interconnected challenges: weak infrastructure and insecurity (DRC), economic and administrative limitations (Burundi), restrictive legal frameworks (Tanzania and Malawi), and the absence of an asylum system (Libya).

Ultimately, the inability of refugees to obtain and use CTDs is not merely a technical or administrative problem—it is a profound protection concern with direct implications for their safety, rights, and long-term future. Understanding these gaps is therefore essential for informing policy reforms, strengthening refugee mobility systems, and ensuring that CTDs function as intended under international law: as instruments that uphold the dignity, protection, and human rights of refugees and enable their access to durable solutions.

CONVENTIONAL TRAVEL DOCUMENTS:

How Legal and Policy Gaps pose obstacles to refugees' Protection and Durable Solutions

To investigate how legal and policy gaps surrounding the issuance, recognition, and use of Convention Travel Documents affect refugees’ freedom of movement, protection, and access to durable solutions in different African-country contexts.

The Overall Objective of the Study

For more information, Contact INUA FOUNDATION RESEARCH DESK