(INCHEON, SOUTH KOREA) A 10-year-old boy and his father from Mali have spent more than four months in an Incheon Airport holding room after South Korean authorities refused to give their asylum claim a formal review, leaving them stuck between countries with no clear path forward. The pair filed for protection on arrival but failed the initial screening stage that decides whether a case moves to a full refugee hearing. As of October 21, 2025, officials say the case remains under review, with no resolution yet.
The prolonged confinement of a child inside an airport facility has renewed debate over South Korea’s approach to asylum seekers at the border and whether current procedures protect children from harm. Rights groups often stress that lengthy airport stays can cause anxiety, sleep problems, and developmental setbacks for young people.
The boy has now spent his days inside a restricted space where regular schooling, outdoor play, and routine medical care can be hard to ensure, raising questions about South Korea’s duty of care.
How the system works and how this family got stuck
Under South Korea’s system, applicants first face an initial screening to decide if their claim will be formally reviewed. Many are rejected at this early gatekeeping stage. If a person cannot return home due to safety fears, they can end up stranded in legal limbo. That is what has happened to this Mali father–son pair.
- The father says they cannot safely return to Mali, yet they are barred from entering South Korea.
- With no permission to enter and no viable exit, the Incheon Airport holding room has become their world.
Policy and child welfare questions
The case arrives as lawmakers, advocates, and the public weigh how South Korea balances border control with obligations toward children. The United Nations and many human rights groups urge countries to avoid detaining minors and to use alternatives such as community placement with regular check-ins.
Those recommendations include:
- Quick access to a fair asylum process
- Legal help and interpreters
- Child-sensitive procedures that consider the child’s best interests, schooling, and health
South Korea says it is still reviewing the pair’s situation but has not offered a timeline.
Globally, airport detention is not new. Adults and families have spent weeks or months in transit zones in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East when carriers will not fly them onward and border authorities refuse entry. The United States has also faced controversy for holding families and children in closed facilities while they wait for interviews and court dates, sometimes for months or even years. International guidance discourages this model for children, citing mental health risks and the strain of confinement.
According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, international standards from the UN refugee agency call for strong safeguards for children, including:
- Quick, fair screening
- Community-based options instead of closed settings
- Access to education and medical care while cases are pending
The Malian family’s experience tests how those ideas are applied in practice at a busy hub like Incheon, where arrivals, security, airline rules, and immigration screening intersect.
What the law allows — and what it doesn’t
South Korea’s system allows an initial filter for asylum claims before a full review. Officials say this helps manage limited resources. Critics argue that rejecting cases at the door without a formal review can block people with real protection needs, especially those who struggle to explain their case under stress or due to language barriers.
When airlines refuse return travel and when home country risks are real, people can get trapped in the transit area. In this case, the boy’s age has amplified concern that a short-term measure has turned into a months-long confinement.
For policymakers, the practical choices are complex:
- Allow entry and place the family in the community with check-ins or in a child-appropriate shelter while the case proceeds.
- Maintain the current stance, risking prolonged airport stays that can harm a child’s development.
- Press for removal, despite the father’s stated safety concerns about Mali.
Each option carries legal, humanitarian, and political weight, and each sends a message to other asylum seekers about South Korea’s approach at the border.
Transit zones are not designed for long stays. Fluorescent lights, noise, and limited privacy can affect sleep and mood. Diet and exercise often suffer. For children, the absence of routine schooling is especially hard. Even if volunteers or staff bring books or arrange lessons, the setting is no substitute for a classroom. Over four months, those small gaps add up to a serious interruption in a child’s life.
The father’s insistence that they cannot return to Mali places the spotlight on the non-refoulement principle — the core refugee protection norm that bars sending people back to places where they face persecution. While South Korea applies its own laws and screening tests, public debate will ask whether the initial denial of a formal review meets that standard in practice, especially for a child. The outcome of this case could shape future airport decisions and push updates to screening guidance for families.
Agreed principle: time matters
Officials and advocates differ on the best way forward but agree on one point: time matters. The longer a child remains in a holding room, the harder it becomes to protect health and well-being.
Even without a final ruling, authorities can take steps that ease harm, such as:
- Child-focused health checks
- Access to fresh air and outdoor time
- Supervised schooling and psychosocial support
Some countries allow temporary entry for minors while cases proceed. Others arrange community hosting with regular reporting. South Korea could consider similar measures while it reviews policy.
Practical steps suggested by child welfare groups
- Prioritizing interviews for minors and families to shorten wait times
- Providing immediate access to legal help and interpreters
- Ensuring daily schooling, outdoor time, and pediatric care
- Using community-based alternatives instead of closed airport rooms
Official resources
For official information about refugee procedures and border control in South Korea, readers can consult the Korea Immigration Service (Ministry of Justice). While this site does not speak to individual cases, it explains the government framework that shapes screening and admission decisions at ports of entry like Incheon.
Possible reforms and the human stakes
As debate deepens, South Korea faces a choice between sticking with tough gatekeeping at the airport door or building in extra safeguards for children and other vulnerable people. Lawmakers may explore:
- Clear limits on time spent in holding rooms
- Faster review tracks for minors
- Written rules steering officials toward community options whenever possible
Each reform would reduce the risk of another child spending months in a transit area.
For the Mali father and son, the next days will matter. A decision to grant a formal review could move them out of the Incheon Airport holding room into a more humane setting while their case is heard. A decision to maintain the denial would likely keep them stranded, unless a third country agrees to receive them or the airline allows outbound travel — both uncertain paths. For now, their world remains a fluorescent-lit room steps away from boarding gates that neither child nor parent can cross.
Key takeaway: swift, child-sensitive procedures and community alternatives can reduce harm to minors stuck in transit zones. Time-bound safeguards and access to schooling, medical care, and legal help are practical measures that authorities can implement even before a final asylum decision.
This Article in a Nutshell
A Malian father and his 10-year-old son have been held in Incheon Airport’s holding room for over four months after failing South Korea’s initial asylum screening. The pair applied for protection on arrival but were denied formal review; as of October 21, 2025, authorities say the case remains under review. Child welfare groups and the UN recommend avoiding detention of minors and favor quick screening, legal help, interpreters, and community-based alternatives. Critics argue that gatekeeping at entry points risks violating non-refoulement and harms children through disrupted schooling, sleep problems, and anxiety. Proposals include accelerated reviews for minors, temporary community entry, time limits on holding-room stays, and immediate access to health and education while cases proceed.
