Pakistan’s deportation policy: Questioning its adherence to non-refoulement  

Guest post by Hanna Gjelsvik Berg. Hanna is a research assistant at the BEYOND project at the Faculty of Law, University of Oslo. 

In October 2023, Pakistan’s government initiated the “Illegal Foreigners’ Repatriation Plan” (IFRP), targeting Afghans residing in the country. Since then, the government has repatriated or deported over 950,000 Afghan refugees and other migrants. How does the sudden deportation policy affect the long-settled Afghan refugees in the country, and what are its implications on the principle of non-refoulement? 

Leave the country or face deportation 

Pakistan has been one of the world's largest host countries, with the majority being Afghan refugees residing in the country for decades. However, due to regional instability and a spike in terrorist attacks, there has been a gradual shift in the perception of Afghan refugees, from brothers with islamic and cultural affinity to security concerns. The government of Pakistan has publicly blamed refugees and immigrants for alleged involvement in criminal and terrorist activities. As such, the government’s announcement of the IFRP was a direct response to these rising security concerns.  

When the government first announced the IFRP in October 2023, over three million Afghans lived in Pakistan with various legal statuses, making them particularly vulnerable to the enforcement policies. The first phase of the plan demanded all "illegal foreigners” to leave the country by November 1, 2023, or face deportation. The official language failed to distinguish between refugees and asylum seekers who may lack formal documentation due to various circumstances and other undocumented migrants.   

This is not the first time the Pakistani government has forcibly repatriated Afghan refugees. The last large-scale expulsion occurred in 2016, an action that Human Rights Watch characterized as the "world’s largest unlawful mass forced return of refugees in recent times." Given the ongoing repatriation plan, which exceeds the size of previous efforts, there are growing concerns about whether Pakistan routinely violates the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits states to return individuals to places where they face a serious risk of persecution or threats to their lives. 

Expelling refugees with legal protection 

Organized in three phases, the initial phase of the repatriation plan targeted mainly undocumented Afghans. Despite the government’s expressed intent to solely expel “undocumented aliens”, phases two and three entailed the forced return of Afghans legally residing in Pakistan.  

There are two categories of legal residency: individuals holding the Afghan Citizenship Card (ACC) and individuals with Proof of Registration (PoR) cards. ACC holders are registered by the government, which until recently gave them legal protection against detention and deportation. However, in early March 2025, the Interior Minister abruptly announced the second phase of the plan, which demanded that ACC holders leave the country within the month or risk deportation. Although the deadline was arbitrarily extended from March 31 until April 30, Pakistan still repatriated approximately 144,000 Afghans in the weeks leading up to the extended deadline, 30,000 of whom were deported.   

While the ACC holders are registered by the government, PoR card holders are formally registered refugees by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Afghan refugees who arrived in the 1980s received prima facie recognition without documentation and the growing group has throughout the years been recognized as refugees; however, the shift in perception explained above, has led to a withdrawal of that recognition. At present, the government labels Afghan refugees as "illegal aliens," regardless of their legal status. Consequently, the third phase of the repatriation plan requires PoR card holders to leave the country by June 30 or be deported. The validity of these cards has been extended arbitrarily over the years, which raises questions about the precarity and treatment individuals holding these cards experience. 

Upholding the principle of non-refoulement 

Pakistan’s crackdown on Afghans has received extensive criticism from national and international organizations, as well as human rights groups. Considering the current situation in Afghanistan after the Taliban takeover in 2021, there is a substantial concern that forcibly deporting thousands of Afghan refugees could place many at risk. UNHCR implemented a non-return advisory in 2021 to suspend the forced returns of Afghan nationals. Condemning Pakistan for its unlawful deportations, arbitrary arrests, and harassment, international organizations have urged the government to reverse its decision and uphold the principle of non-refoulement.  

​​Given the IFRP claim that all foreigners in Pakistan are "illegal aliens", the ongoing deportation of Afghans is not being considered a breach of non-refoulement; instead the government asserts that the policy complies with international norms and principles. Pakistan's terminology of refugees obscures international legal definitions and protection of the group, effectively denying Afghan refugees the possibility of formal recognition in the country. Although Pakistan remains a non-signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol, customary international law prohibits refoulement, which must be adhered to by all countries. The ambiguous status for refugees in Pakistan and narrative of illegality, underscores the complexity of non-refoulement in states lacking refugee rights. 

Depriving refugees of their autonomy  

A UNHCR-IOM report found that 89% of undocumented individuals and ACC holders returned to Afghanistan due to fear of arrest. Reports indicate that Pakistani police have conducted home raids, detained and beaten individuals, and confiscated residence permits before deporting the refugees. Crucially, as Human Rights Watch pointed out, refoulement does not only occur “when a refugee is directly rejected or expelled, but also when indirect pressure is so intense that it leads people to believe they have no option but to return to a country where they face a serious risk of harm.” Indirect pressure includes tight deadlines to return to life-threatening conditions and the threat of deportation, detention or harassment if individuals do not leave. On this basis, Pakistan’s repatriation plan raises serious concerns regarding its adherence to the principle of non-refoulement and established principles of international law, further underscored by its disregard for UNHCR’s non-return advisory.  

The repatriation plan remains strictly confidential, leaving its contours unknown. Without access to the policy document, legal aid organizations and civil society groups are unable to challenge the details of the policy via the court system, nor scrutinize the document in regards to non-refoulement principles. It is high time that the government of Pakistan provides transparency and publishes the IFRP. The lack of information and transparency further deprives the refugees of their autonomy and level of predictability. Additionally, the government's ambiguous and arbitrary manner exacerbates an already dire situation.  Millions of Afghan refugees in Pakistan deserve to know how their lives will be affected as the repatriation continues. 

The BEYOND project recently organized a roundtable in Islamabad to address the politically sensitive and timely issue of refugee governance in Pakistan. The roundtable brought together representatives from a range of state ministries, international organizations, civil society organizations and academics. Read about the Islamabad roundtable here. 

Any comments about this post? Get in touch with us! Send us an email, or find us on LinkedIn and BlueSky.