Article 31 remains a vital provision of the 1951 Convention as much as an uneasy compromise. It is a rather complex provision affecting a much broader range of issues than the criminalization of immigration infractions and detention. Due to the difference between contemporary migratory realities and those of the drafting period, it is not straightforwardly applied. Resort to the travaux préparatoires in defiance of the interpretation norms of the VCLT amplifies them acutely. There should be no mistake about the fatal consequences of an overly narrow construction; it risks exacerbating contemporary obstacles to refugees’ access to territory, procedure, and protection.

Even with the most meticulous interpretation efforts, there are some issues which Art. 31 is unable to address fully. How are lawyers to deal with the cumulative deterrent effect of measures which are not penalties in the technical sense? What should be done with refugees recognized as such, yet denied authorization to remain in the territorial State? How should the suffering of those lawfully detained be alleviated? These and other questions may to some extent find answers in human rights law or domestic law. There is a residual, though, to which the current State of the law outrageously fails to attend.