This concluding chapter synthesises the book’s central argument that the absence of a comprehensive refugee law in India has transformed refugee governance into an act of discretionary benevolence rather than state accountability. It critiques India’s reliance on moral goodwill and administrative flexibility, which, while appearing humanitarian, perpetuates structural inequality and suppresses refugee agency. Using the Tibetan refugee experience as a case study, the chapter demonstrates how the politics of hospitality masks legal exclusion and social conflict. Refugees, though symbolically celebrated, remain confined within systems that prioritise control over rights and gratitude over participation. The chapter advances a human rights framework that links refugee protection to agency—emphasising autonomy, welfare, and liberty as essential conditions for dignity. Within this framework, the State–Society Dialogical Approach (SSDA) is reaffirmed as a model for embedding refugee participation, conflict resolution, and reciprocity within legal and institutional structures. It argues that genuine protection requires dialogue anchored in enforceable rights, not temporary compassion. Recommendations include enacting a national refugee law grounded in human rights, establishing multi-level refugee institutions, and promoting social and cultural assessments to pre-empt refugee–host conflicts. The chapter concludes by urging a shift from the politics of hospitality—which reinforces asymmetry between host and refugee—to the ethic of hospitality, which recognises mutual vulnerability and moral equality. Such a transformation, it contends, would align India’s democratic ethos with its humanitarian legacy, redefining refugee protection as an enduring commitment to justice, coexistence, and shared humanity.