In Protection from Refuge: From Refugee Rights to Migration Management, Ogg adeptly traces the evolution of refugee law and protection through persistent legal mobilization. She spans two decades of refugee litigation and traverses across multiple, pluralistic legal regimes, taking account of judgments of courts from the North American, European, and African continents. This ambitious project sets out to understand what the legal concept of refuge is, and how (legal) decision-makers conceptualize and decide to litigate such a notion. In this way, Ogg shows how decision-makers engage with the concept of refuge, conceptualize disparate protection needs or vulnerabilities, and dispense or withhold “the remedy: refuge” (p. 194), finding that, over time, refuge has become increasingly held out of reach, but through sustained legal mobilization, also has the potential to become more broadly attainable.

Ogg structures the book's findings across eight chapters, each of which has its own focus and well-structured subsections, drawing on a wide database of case law to dissect the understandings, rationale and justifications upheld by decision-makers. In Chapter 1, Ogg sets the stage, outlining the academic, legal and societal context, methods used, theoretical toolkit, and scope. Notably, she includes the perspectives of those seeking refuge, drawing on several memoirs published. In doing so, she both gives a voice to refugees, while avoiding the frequent re-traumatization and/or exploitation that refugees can experience in the research process. The rich experiential contributions are presented alongside academic and legal conceptions of refuge. In Chapter 2, Ogg outlines the debates around refuge as concept and place, engaging with the history of “refuge” in a societal and legal sense, as well as the function of refuge, both in its idealized conception and real-world application. Refuge, concludes Ogg, can be understood as having “restorative, regenerative and palliative functions that address refugees' past, present and future” (p. 54) but are not always present in practice. In this way, the book appeals to a broad audience, from students and newcomers to dialogues around refugee law, to more experienced legal scholars and practitioners.

Drawing on a feminist framework, Ogg addresses the crucial role of an intersectional and gender-sensitive approach to litigating refugee law, which resonates with the life and work of legendary scholar-practitioners such as the late Rhonda Copelon (Zarkov et al., 2011). Illustrative of this approach, in Chapter 3 Ogg draws attention to the gendered and intersectional aspects of decision-makers' application of categorical, experiential, or blended categorical and experiential reasoning, while simultaneously examining the particular vulnerabilities of women. Accordingly, she shows how the parent–child relationship plays out in the Kenyan courtroom with regards to notions of refugeehood and status-associated rights at the national level, honing in on “model refugee behavior” (pp. 72–75). This idea is further developed in Chapter 4 where she explores legal mobilization efforts in Europe to conceptualize the “exceptional refugee,” or rather ‘exceptionally vulnerable refugee’, in order to secure protection that would otherwise fall outside conventional definitions of refugees (p. 106). Alongside the state-centric exceptionality that legal refuge often entails, in Chapter 4 Ogg addresses the trend of externalization and longstanding question of responsibility, a conversation which in Chapter 5 transforms into an examination of the willful expansion or contraction of borders in a territorial and judicial sense, regional containment practices and bilateral agreements.

All the while, Ogg returns to the “gender question”, paying specific attention to the ways in which privilege, marginality or vulnerability might be emphasized or overlooked within legal hearings, noting the intersectional positionality of those seeking (protection from) refuge. Within Chapter 6, she analyses the specific extent to which Palestinian refugees have been structurally excluded from the mainstream (UNHCR) refugee protection regime, while effectively asserting their rights through other legal protection regimes, albeit by resembling “war-inspired, Western notions of a refugee” (p. 172). The value brought by a feminist and intersectional lens also becomes tangible in Chapter 7, where Ogg locates the ways in which “decision-makers refer to personal circumstances in a way that positions the prospective IDP as a person with the talent or fortitude to endure the most hostile conditions” (p. 188). Covering a broad range of case law and relying heavily on scholarship by Patricia Tuitt, James Hathaway and Michelle Foster, she illustrates how “decision-makers characterise putative refugees, of all genders, as young, healthy and strong” (p. 189) in order to leave them outside the scope of refugee protection.

Expanding beyond feminist theory, Ogg's work engages with a diverse range of scholarship relevant to the state of the art in the field of migration and legal studies, including sociolegal and critical legal studies, and in particular Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL). While not explicitly noted, an additional theoretical framework that Ogg's work seems compatible with is the New Mobilities paradigm. It could have been interesting to reflect on what Sheller (2018) refers to as the “mobile ontology” working towards achieving “mobility justice” at work, particularly in the closing chapter remarks on elusive refuge. In particular, the metaphor of Tantalus that Ogg evokes could have been animated even further to explore how refuge is a concept and experience that both eludes those on the move, while also being found in motion itself. Of course, this is just an additional reflection, and certainly not an oversight. Indeed, Ogg incorporate multiple, relevant historic and contemporary academic, legal, and policy debates and critical insights on the contested nature of mobility within the book.

Overall, Ogg's book makes an important intellectual contribution to understanding the ongoing issue of quality in the provision and enjoyment of refuge. Her arguments suggest important implications for legal learning by practitioners and policy-makers alike, including the future strategic direction that legal mobilization of refugeehood and refugee status determination could take, as we find ourselves in an era of increasing nativism. Furthermore, Ogg contributes to the field of human security within the field of migration governance (Bilgic et al., 2020; Estrada-Tanck, 2013). The concerns she raises also match those of Behrman (2019) and Chimni (2009), confirming how the interests of states persistently triumph over the individual interests of those on the move, including refugees. Ogg's book furthermore complements the work of Estrada-Tanck who likewise explores the vulnerability and obligation to protect, in the case of undocumented migrants finding that “human security… may have the potential to act as a catalyst for the realization of human rights in the contemporary world” (Estrada-Tanck, 2013, p. 167).

In short, this book makes a deeply-thoughtful, wide-ranging, and highly readable contribution to both the scholarly discussion and practice of refugee and migration law, towards achieving a robust, restorative, and crucial enjoyment of protection, including though by no means limited to the state-centric concept of refuge.

免于避难：从难民权利到移民管理, Ogg 通过持续的法律动员巧妙地追溯了难民法和保护的演变。她跨越了 20 年的难民诉讼，跨越了多个多元法律制度，并考虑了北美、欧洲和非洲大陆的法院判决。这个雄心勃勃的项目旨在了解庇护的法律概念是什么，以及（法律）决策者如何概念化并决定对这样的概念提起诉讼。通过这种方式，Ogg 展示了决策者如何使用避难所的概念，将不同的保护需求或脆弱性概念化，以及免除或拒绝“补救措施：避难所”（第 194 页），发现随着时间的推移，避难所变得越来越遥不可及，但通过持续的法律动员，也有可能在更广泛的范围内实现。

奥格将本书的发现分为八章，每一章都有自己的重点和结构合理的小节，利用广泛的判例法数据库来剖析决策者所坚持的理解、理由和理由。在第 1 章中，奥格奠定了基础，概述了学术、法律和社会背景、使用的方法、理论工具包和范围。值得注意的是，她借鉴了几本已出版的回忆录，纳入了寻求避难者的观点。在这样做的过程中，她既让难民有发言权，又避免了难民在研究过程中可能经历的频繁的再次创伤和/或剥削。丰富的经验贡献与庇护的学术和法律概念一起呈现。在第 2 章中，奥格概述了围绕避难所作为概念和场所的争论，在社会和法律意义上参与“避难所”的历史，以及避难所的功能，无论是理想化的概念还是现实世界的应用。奥格总结说，避难可以理解为具有“解决难民过去、现在和未来的恢复性、再生性和缓解性功能”（第 54 页），但在实践中并不总是存在。通过这种方式，这本书吸引了广泛的读者，从学生和新来者到围绕难民法的对话，再到更有经验的法律学者和从业者。54) 但在实践中并不总是存在。通过这种方式，这本书吸引了广泛的读者，从学生和新来者到围绕难民法的对话，再到更有经验的法律学者和从业者。54) 但在实践中并不总是存在。通过这种方式，这本书吸引了广泛的读者，从学生和新来者到围绕难民法的对话，再到更有经验的法律学者和从业者。

借鉴女权主义框架，Ogg 阐述了交叉和性别敏感方法在诉讼难民法中的关键作用，这与已故的 Rhonda Copelon 等传奇学者-实践者的生活和工作产生共鸣（Zarkov 等人，2011 年 ）). 为了说明这种方法，Ogg 在第 3 章中提请注意决策者应用分类、经验或混合分类和经验推理的性别和交叉方面，同时检查女性的特殊脆弱性。因此，她展示了肯尼亚法庭在国家层面关于难民身份和与身份相关的权利的概念方面的亲子关系是如何发挥作用的，并着眼于“模范难民行为”（第 72-75 页）。这一想法在第 4 章中得到进一步发展，她在该章探讨了欧洲的法律动员工作，以概念化“特殊难民”，或者更确切地说，是“特别脆弱的难民”，以确保获得传统难民定义之外的保护（第 106 页） ).

一直以来，奥格都回到了“性别问题”，特别关注在法律听证会上可能强调或忽视特权、边缘或脆弱性的方式，并指出那些寻求（保护免受）避难的人的交叉地位。在第 6 章中，她分析了巴勒斯坦难民在结构上被排除在主流（难民署）难民保护制度之外的具体程度，同时通过其他法律保护制度有效维护他们的权利，尽管类似于“受战争启发的西方概念难民”（第 172 页）。女权主义和交叉镜头带来的价值在第 7 章中也变得有形，Ogg 找到了“决策者参考个人情况的方式，将潜在的国内流离失所者定位为具有忍受最恶劣条件的才能或毅力的人”（第 188 页）。她涵盖了广泛的判例法，并在很大程度上依赖于帕特里夏·图伊特 (Patricia Tuitt)、詹姆斯·海瑟薇 (James Hathaway) 和米歇尔·福斯特 (Michelle Foster) 的奖学金，她在书中说明了“决策者如何将所有性别的推定难民描述为年轻、健康和强壮”（第 189 页）令他们脱离难民保护范围。

超越女权主义理论，Ogg 的工作涉及与移民和法律研究领域的最新技术相关的各种奖学金，包括社会法律和批判法律研究，特别是第三世界国际法方法 (TWAIL)。虽然没有明确指出，但 Ogg 的工作似乎与之兼容的另一个理论框架是新流动性范式。反思 Sheller（ 2018 年）所说的致力于在工作中实现“流动正义”的“移动本体论”，尤其是在最后一章关于难以捉摸的避难所的评论中，可能会很有趣。特别是坦塔罗斯的比喻Ogg 唤起的东西本可以进一步动画化，以探索避难所是一种概念和体验，它既能避开移动中的人，又能在运动中被发现。当然，这只是一种补充反映，当然不是疏忽。事实上，Ogg 在书中包含了多个相关的历史和当代学术、法律和政策辩论以及对流动性有争议性质的批判性见解。

总的来说，奥格的书对理解避难所的提供和享受中持续存在的质量问题做出了重要的智力贡献。她的论点对从业者和决策者等人的法律学习具有重要意义，包括在我们发现自己处于日益本土主义的时代时，难民身份的法律动员和难民身份确定可能采取的未来战略方向。此外，Ogg 在移民治理领域为人类安全领域做出了贡献（Bilgic 等人，  2020 年；Estrada-Tanck，  2013 年）。她提出的担忧也与 Behrman ( 2019 ) 和 Chimni ( 2009)的担忧相符)，确认国家利益如何始终战胜包括难民在内的流动者的个人利益。Ogg 的书进一步补充了 Estrada-Tanck 的工作，Estrada-Tanck 同样探讨了无证移民的脆弱性和保护义务，发现“人类安全……可能有潜力成为当代实现人权的催化剂”世界”（Estrada-Tanck，  2013 年，第 167 页）。

简而言之，这本书对难民和移民法的学术讨论和实践做出了深思熟虑、广泛和高度可读的贡献，以实现强有力的、恢复性的和至关重要的保护享受，包括但绝不是仅限于以国家为中心的皈依概念。