Forced Migration in the OIC Member Countries:
Policy Framework Adopted by Host Countries
67
3. COUNTRY CASE STUDIES
This chapter presents detailed insights into forced migration trends, protection policies, and
poverty alleviation approaches in five case study countries: Turkey, Jordan, Morocco, Uganda,
and Sweden. These countries represent each of the three OIC geographic regions as well as
countries hosting a substantial number of forced migrants from OIC member states.1 These
case studies have been carefully chosen to provide a range of forced migration experiences
and approaches to protection.
Turkey and Morocco represent emerging destinations for refugee and migration flows. Both
countries have historically viewed themselves primarily as sources of or transit points for
migration to Europe. Yet rising migration flows to both countries have called this narrative
into question as migrants and refugees have increasingly sought protection in, rather than
transiting through, Turkey and Morocco. In response, both countries are in the process of
developing and implementing comprehensive legislation to manage migration and asylum
flows. In Morocco, asylum legislation has yet to be passed, while in Turkey, government
authorities are currently engaged in massive efforts to implement an asylum and migration
law passed in 2013. Both case studies offer lessons on the practical challenges establishing an
asylum regime can entail.
Turkey, with Jordan, is also a key host to what is now the largest refugee population globally,
Syrians. Both have responded generously to the rapidly rising flows of refugees from the
Syrian war, providing temporary protection and most recently access to employment. Yet
their responses reflect marked contrasts in their differing legal approaches to refugee
protection. While Turkey has made a distinct effort to incorporate Syrians into its emerging
asylum legal regime, protection in Jordan continues to be governed by much more ad hoc
policy decisions.
Jordan, together with Uganda, also provides a critical look at a country dealing with the
challenge of protracted refugee situations. Jordan has afforded protection to millions of
Palestinian refugees for nearly 70 years, while Uganda has long been home to refugees from
neighboring Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In both cases, substantial new
refugee flows—from Syrian to Jordan and from South Sudan to Uganda—have thus come on
top of already significant and established refugee populations. In both Uganda and Jordan,
experiences with these previous refugee flows have informed current approaches to
protection.
Finally, Sweden, while not an OIC country, has been one of the largest destinations for forced
migrants in Europe, a region that serves as a destination for onward migration of forced
migrants from many OIC countries. Between 2011 and 2015, nearly three-quarters of asylum
applications in Sweden came from OIC countries. Aside from its relevance as a destination for
OIC forced migrants, Sweden also offers an example of a country with a highly developed and
well-resourced asylum and social protection system. Yet large-scale flows of forced migrants
into Europe in 2015 posed a significant challenge even for the Sweden system, offering a
lesson about what even a country with a well-developed asylum system can be expected to
handle alone.
1 Together, the five case study countries are home to over 10 percent of OIC forced migrants (nearly 4 million individuals.
Author’s calculations from UNHCR, “Population Statistics,” accessed August 8, 2016,