Legally literate but disempowered: urban refugees and national screening mechanism in Thailand

This dissertation examines the relationship between legal literacy, empowerment, and protection outcomes among urban refugees and asylum seekers in Thailand, focusing on the 2019 National Screening Mechanism (NSM). Thailand, a non-signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention and hosting about 5,500 refugees mainly in Bangkok, lacks formal refugee laws. Its recent NSM reflects limited progress in regional protection mechanisms, functioning within a framework that emphasizes state security over human security. The study posits that urban refugees understand the law, like the NSM, but remain powerless because Thailand's approach prioritizes security over protection. This study addresses three interconnected research questions that investigate the relationship between legal frameworks, knowledge acquisition, and the empowerment approach in Thailand. The first question examines how the National Screening Mechanism's legal and political dynamics address urban refugees and asylum seekers, with a focus on how concerns about state sovereignty affect protection efforts. The second question examines to what extent urban refugees and asylum seekers are aware of the NSM and how they acquire the necessary knowledge to access legal protection. The third question examines how strengthening the NSM's legal knowledge impacts protection outcomes for urban refugee communities, particularly the disparity between their theoretical rights and their actual implementation. The study employs an exploratory qualitative approach that combines different data collection methods to capture the complexity of refugee experiences in Thailand. The study gathered primary data through questionnaires given to 30 urban refugees and asylum seekers from various countries, in-depth interviews with 20 participants chosen for their diverse demographic backgrounds and experiences, and key informant interviews with eight experts from refugee relief agencies and academic institutions. The study also analyzed various documents, including NSM regulations, academic papers, policy documents, and media reports, to add depth to the analysis. More importantly, the study received ethical approval and followed international standards for research involving vulnerable populations. The study reveals that Thailand's NSM represents incremental progress in refugee protection; however, it also reinforces exclusionary policies that severely limit genuine empowerment. A review of documents shows that the NSM's regulatory framework puts immigration control above refugee protection, such as portraying displaced persons as "aliens" requiring management rather than as individuals needing humanitarian help. The mechanism's complicated bureaucratic procedures, including mandatory detention during screening and high bail requirements, intentionally create obstacles that deter applications while giving the appearance of meeting protection requirements. The study highlights a gap between legal knowledge and protection. Despite understanding laws like the NSM, refugees in Thailand still face arrest, detention, and deportation under the Immigration Act 1979. It contributes to refugee and development studies by challenging assumptions about knowledge and power, introducing the field of legal empowerment. The concept of "legally literate but disempowered" offers a crucial perspective for understanding how knowledge raises awareness of vulnerabilities without providing actual tools for protection. Building on Cecilia Menjivar's "liminal legality," the study shows how refugees are stuck in legal limbo, where their physical presence conflicts with their legal status, making their rights meaningless within a security-focused refugee system. This dissertation concludes that Thailand's refugee management reflects a regional trend: the creation of complex exclusion mechanisms disguised as protection. Although the NSM demonstrates institutional progress, it primarily enhances state control over displaced populations, rather than fostering genuine integration or empowerment. Urban refugees in Thailand demonstrate that legal knowledge alone cannot overcome structural barriers in restrictive environments. Ultimately, Thailand's new policy, like the NSM in Thailand, does not provide genuine protection that refugees need and instead focuses on managing asylum seekers due to national security concerns.