Not Bound but Committed: Operationalizing the Global Compact on Refugees

The Global Compact on Refugees is not legally binding, but it gives rise to commitments by the international community as a whole. It is also rooted in international refugee law, international human rights law and international humanitarian law. This article addresses how the GCR cannot give rise to binding obligations in international law, yet provide for enhanced protection and assistance to refugees and hosting communities, and establish commitments for a fairer and more predictable sharing of burdens and responsibilities. It does this by reference to other non‐legally binding international documents and rules of law. Additionally, the use of indicators to measure states’ and other international actors’ performance in operationalizing the GCR provides a framework to measure commitments; coupled with greater humanitarian and development co‐operation, commitments can be better facilitated even if the GCR is not legally binding. Finally, the sharing of burdens and responsibilities is also fulfilled by the emphasis on solutions.     

From Zero to Hero? An analysis of the human rights protections within the Global Compact for Safe,Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM)

This article examines the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) from three perspectives: First, while the GCM is not legally binding, the human rights obligations of states which underpin the GCM are. The application of international human rights law to everyone, including migrants, has led to frictions in the inter‐governmental negotiation process, with some states declining to sign the GCM. States cannot relieve themselves of the human rights obligations to which they are already, voluntarily, bound by refusing to sign the GCM. Second, the GCM asserts the human rights of migrants, and by implication condemns state practices contrary thereto, but it also yields to political sensitivities. Thus, we encounter a Compact that defends existing human rights standards, but concurrently submits to political will and tolerates conditions of vulnerability. Third, the GCM’s implementation depends upon, as yet undefined, partnerships with non‐State actors and monitoring against human rights standards.     

Human Rights of Migrants: Challenges of the New Decade

This review summarizes main trends, issues, debates, actors and initiatives regarding recognition and extension of protection of the human rights of migrants. Its premise is that the rule of law and universal notions of human rights are essential foundations for democratic society and social peace. Evidence demonstrates that violations of migrants' human rights are so widespread and commonplace that they are a defining feature of international migration today. About 150 million persons live outside their countries; in many States, legal application of human rights norms to non‐citizens is inadequate or seriously deficient, especially regarding irregular migrants. Extensive hostility against, abuse of and violence towards migrants and other non‐nationals has become much more visible worldwide in recent years. Research, documentation and analysis of the character and extent of problems and of effective remedies remain minimal. Resistance to recognition of migrants' rights is bound up in exploitation of migrants in marginal, low status, inadequately regulated or illegal sectors of economic activity. Unauthorized migrants are often treated as a reserve of flexible labour, outside the protection of labour safety, health, minimum wage and other standards, and easily deportable. Evidence on globalization points to worsening migration pressures in many parts of the world. Processes integral to globalization have intensified disruptive effects of modernization and capitalist development, contributing to economic insecurity and displacement for many. Extension of principles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights culminated in the 1990 International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. With little attention, progress in ratifications was very slow until two years ago. A global campaign revived attention; entry into force is likely in 2001. Comparative analysis notes that ILO migrant worker Conventions have generally achieved objectives but States have resisted adoption of any standards on treatment of non‐nationals. A counter‐offensive against human rights as universal, indivisible and inalienable underlies resistance to extension of human rights protection to migrants. A parallel trend is deliberate association of migration and migrants with criminality. Trafficking has emerged as a global theme contextualizing migration in a framework of combatting organized crime and criminality, subordinating human rights protections to control and anti‐crime measures. Intergovernmental cooperation on migration “management” is expanding rapidly, with functioning regional intergovernmental consultative processes in all regions, generally focused on strengthening inter‐state cooperation in controlling and preventing irregular migration through improved border controls, information sharing, return agreements and other measures. Efforts to defend human rights of migrants and combat xenophobia remain fragmented, limited in impact and starved of resources. Nonetheless, NGOs in all regions provide orientation, services and assistance to migrants, public education and advocating respect for migrants rights and dignity. Several international initiatives now highlight migrant protection concerns, notably the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights of Migrants, the Global Campaign promoting the 1990 UN Convention, UN General Assembly proclamation of International Migrants Day, the 2001 World Conference Against Racism and Xenophobia, anti‐discrimination activity by ILO, and training by IOM. Suggestions to governments emphasize the need to define comprehensive, coordinated migration policy and practice based on economic, social and development concerns rather than reactive control measures to ensure beneficial migration, social harmony, and dignified treatment of nationals and non‐nationals. NGOs, businesses, trade unions, and religious groups are urged to advocate respect for international standards, professionalize services and capacities, take leadership in opposing xenophobic behaviour, and join international initiatives. Need for increased attention to migrants rights initiatives and inter‐agency cooperation by international organizations is also noted.     

Immigration Detention under the Global Compacts in the Light of Refugee and Human Rights Law Standards

The article explores how immigration detention is addressed in the Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) and Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) and investigates the potential implications of the compacts on the existing legal framework regulating the use of immigration detention. While Objective 13 of the GCM largely reflects detention‐related standards under international human rights law, the GCR makes only scarce references to detention in §60. Overall, the compacts risk inhibiting gradual endorsement of the norm of non‐detention of children. On the other hand, they rightly restate the priority for alternatives to detention for adults. States should implement the provisions of the compacts in line with their obligations under international human rights and refugee law. The compacts cannot be used as a pretext to lower domestic detention‐related standards or to diminish the validity of the existing framework governing immigration detention.     

Protecting and Benchmarking Migrants’ Rights: An Analysis of the Global Compact for Safe,Orderly and Regular Migration

The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration (GCM) was to be “guided by human rights law and standards” in recognition of the rights of international migrants, who are currently protected by an overlapping patchwork of treaties and international law. The GCM contains many laudable commitments that, if implemented, will ensure that states more consistently respect, protect, and fulfil the rights of all migrants and also that states incorporate data on migration into a more cohesive governance regime that does more to promote cooperation on the issue of international migration. However, many concerns remain. Using a legal analysis and cross‐national policy data, we find that the GCM neither fully articulates existing law nor makes use of international consensus to expand the rights of migrants. In its first section, this article provides a concise analysis of the GCM's compliance with a set of core principles of existing international human rights law regarding migrants. In the second section, we apply a novel instrument to create an objective, cross‐national accounting of the laws protecting migrants’ rights in various national legal frameworks. Focusing on a sample of five diverse destination and sending countries, the results suggest we are close to an international consensus on the protection of a core set of migrants’ rights. This analysis should help prioritize the work necessary to implement the GCM.     

Protection of Migrants' Human Rights: Principles and Practice

In principle, migrants enjoy the protection of international law. Key human rights instruments oblige the States Parties to extend their protection to all human beings. Such important treaties as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights have been ratified by more than 140 states, but many political, social or economic obstacles seem to stand in the way of offering those rights to migrants. In an attempt to bridge this protection gap, the more specifically targeted International Convention on the Protection of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families was created and adopted by the United Nations in 1990. This treaty is not yet in force, but the number of States Parties is increasing towards the required 20. In the past few years the human rights machinery of the United Nations has increased its attention towards migrants' human rights, appointing in 1999 the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants. Governments, as the acceding parties to international human rights instruments, remain the principal actors as guardians of the human rights of all individuals residing in their territories. Receiving countries are in a key position in the protection of the migrants that they host. However, active defence of migrants' rights is politically difficult in many countries where anti‐immigrant factions are influential. Trafficking in migrants is one example of the complexity faced by states in formulating their migration policies. On the one hand, trafficking has made governments increasingly act together and combine both enforcement and protection. On the other, trafficking, with its easily acceptable human rights concerns, is often separated from the more migration‐related human smuggling. The latter is a more contentious issue, related also to unofficial interests in utilizing cheap undocumented immigrant labour.     

Finding the Homosexual in Women’s Rights

In recent years, organizations on the American Christian Right (CR) have become established actors at the United Nations, working to limit international agreement on developments seen as ‘anti-family’, such as women’s rights, population policy and abortion. At the same time, the Vatican has established itself as a strong voice opposing international law and policy on women’s rights. For both actors, women’s rights represent a direct challenge to the ‘natural family’ and hence a particular world vision premised on a sexual division of labour. While women’s rights is a central preoccupation for both actors, ‘homosexuality’ and the prospect of lesbian and gay rights and ‘gay marriage’ is also a recurrent theme, intricately connected to women’s rights. This article explores the relationship between women’s rights and homosexuality as drawn by these two actors. It asks why, in an international arena that offers little concrete recognition of, or protection for, lesbian and gay identities both the CR and Vatican are concerned about a presumed homosexual agenda. It also explores what role the debate about women’s rights plays in facilitating this ‘homosexual agenda’. In addressing these questions, this article seeks to explore, and raise further questions about international women’s rights as a language for international discussion about social relations.     

Travelling theory in China: contextualization,compromise and combination

In this article we explore the dissemination of human rights ideas in China through an ethnographic study of three women's organizations: the government's ‘letters and complaints’ department, the governmental NGO affiliated with it, and a legal aid centre; all are located in Beijing. We argue that there are two paths in China for the transmission of international human rights ideas – a government one and a non‐government one. The government path, featured as contextual and compromising, is rooted in socialist and collective values, and the governmental organizations we studied function squarely within the domestic legal framework and the concept of ‘women's rights and interests’. The non‐governmental path, by contrast, characterized by vernacularization, namely a combination of international ideas with local practice to promote legal reform in China, is the result of economic development and interactions with the international community. Both paths interact within their different spheres to further the development of women's rights.     

Migration and Human Rights on the Mexico-Guatemala Border

This paper identifies the protections in place for irregular migrants on the Mexico‐Guatemala border and analyzes Mexican government immigration enforcement policies and levels of compliance with international standards and national law. The history of the Mexico‐Guatemala border region and different types of migration flows into and through the area are also explored, as well as the linkages between migration, trade, security, and US immigration policy. It is argued that the Mexican government has partially complied with international conventions and national laws to protect the human rights of transmigrants in the Guatemalan border region, but that compliance is not complete and that an international response is required to ensure that human rights standards are upheld.     

‘Bringing coals to Newcastle’? Human rights,civil rights and social movements in New York City

In this article we examine the encounter between global human rights ideas and domestic discourses of civil rights and social justice, focusing on processes of translation and adaptation of women's human rights in two ethnographic sites in New York City. The first site is a citywide coalition working for the adoption of a New York City human rights ordinance. The second site is an advocacy organization working on domestic violence issues. We find that the local adoption of human rights in New York City – the ‘domestication’ of human rights – takes place in two central sites: law and social movement. We further find that the process of translation takes place unevenly in the two sites, and it is driven primarily by the actors, mechanisms and technologies in the social movement arena. Overall, we witness the emergence of a domestic human rights movement as a new counter‐hegemonic space, characterized by multiplicity in meanings, ideological heterogeneity and ambivalence from those engaged in its construction.     

NATION-STATES CONFRONT THE GLOBAL: Discourses of Indigenous Rights in Fiji and Tanzania

How do global issue constructions serve as resources for actors engaged in domestic political contention, and what does the appropriation of global ideas by domestic actors imply about the spread of global culture? To contribute to knowledge about conflict‐based diffusion of global ideas, we examine the histories of global constructions of indigenous rights and national debates about indigenous rights in Fiji and Tanzania. While global models of indigenous rights emphasize self‐determination for nondominant, culturally distinct groups at risk from the nation‐state, advocates for indigenization policies in Fiji and Tanzania have argued for state policies to entrench political and economic rights for majority or near‐majority groups that were well integrated into the nation‐state. Although transnationally connected indigenous rights organizations have a greater presence in Tanzania than in Fiji, actors in Fiji remain more engaged with changes in international indigenous rights discourse than their counterparts in Tanzania. This difference reflects variations in the leverage global culture offered in the two cases because of its externality to national political debates. In Fiji, actors appropriated global culture as a means to internationalize a domestic dispute, while in Tanzania the impetus for indigenization came from global economic pressures. Our findings imply that conflict‐based diffusion concentrates agency with respect to the use of global legal discourses in domestic actors rather than the globally connected actors and experts who carry global culture in consensus‐based diffusion.     

Disability and democracy in Cambodia: an integrative approach to community building and civic engagement

The political framework through which the various communities of disabled persons in Cambodia advocate for and claim their rights is complex and confusing. Both governmental and non‐governmental actors engage this political framework through the mobilization of persons from the various disabled communities, competing in the civic sphere through issue‐oriented advocacy in ways that seek to influence the process of democratic governance. While the status of disabled rights in Cambodia is still comparatively weak, it is argued here that this civic engagement has allowed disabled communities to find common cause with non‐disabled persons and groups in the project of deepening the roots of democracy in Cambodia. This article discusses the demographic composition of disability, the framework of political action that addresses disability issues and the practice of civic engagement and activism by disabled and non‐disabled communities in Cambodia.     

The law of migrants

While it is acknowledged that international migration law is attracting increased interest, this law merely describes the conditions of admission, sojourn, employment, and exit of migrants, thus amounting in many respects to a restatement of the law of aliens considered in a different perspective. This article concentrates on the humanitarian aspects of migration law, in an attempt to determine the possibility of joint promotion and dissemination of human rights, international humanitarian law, refugee law, law of migrants, and relief law. Refugees are protected by a series of international legal instruments, both universal and regional, which are complemented, if need be, by resolutions of the competent bodies. 2 reasons why the law of migrants deserves to be highlighted and developed are: 1) we have seen that the characteristic aspects of migration are either ignored or only partially taken into account by existing law, and 2) it is important that individuals should be protected in every circumstance. There exists a relatively narrow basis for joint action; since this must be built on points of convergence, a preliminary step consists of identifying this common denominator. The forms which joint action may take can be less structured and reflected in the individual practice of each organization The sine qua non of successful joint action is an awareness of the enterprise's ultimate goal: to assure in every circumstance better protection for human beings, whatever their legal status may be.     

Sociology and the European Court of Human Rights

This article offers a sociological analysis of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Adopting a sociological jurisprudence approach, the article aims to demonstrate the unique and valuable contribution that sociology can make to understanding key aspects of international human rights law. Whilst the article seeks to develop an agenda for critical sociological research on human rights law, it also aims to persuade those charged with the supervision of human rights of the value of sociological analysis. To achieve this, the article focuses on three separate but inter‐related aspects of ECtHR jurisprudence: first, it considers the ECtHR's approach to consensus in its adjudication of human rights complaints; second, it examines the social control implications of the ECtHR's decisions and judgments; and third, it assesses how conceptualizations of social identity are often foundational to the ECtHR's reasoning.     

Policy development: An analysis of disability inclusion in a selection of African Union policies

Contemporary debates in international development discourse are concerned with the non‐tokenistic inclusion and participation of marginalized groups in the policy‐making process in developing countries. This is directly relevant to disabled people in Africa, which is the focus of this article. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities delineates the principles of inclusion in society. Furthermore, the African Union (AU) plays a key role in advising its Member States about disability issues, and this advice should be reflected in disability‐inclusive policies. This article analyses nine policy or strategy documents produced by the AU, covering the policy domains of education, health, employment and social protection that are crucial to the inclusion of disabled people in international development. These were analysed according to seven discrete elements (rights, accessibility, inclusivity, implementation plans, budgetary allocations, enforcement mechanisms or disaggregated management information systems) using a rating scale of one to four, with four being the highest level of inclusion. The process (for example, level of consultation), the context (for example, the Sustainable Development Goals) and actors involved in the policy development were reviewed as far as was possible from the documents. None of the policies reached even 50% of the total possible score, indicating poor levels of genuine inclusion. Rights scored a highest rating, but still at a low level. This suggests that there is recognition of the rights of disabled people to inclusion, but this is not generally integrated within inclusive implementation plans, budgetary allocations, enforcement mechanisms or disaggregated management information systems for monitoring. The limited socio‐economic inclusion of disability within AU policies is a lost opportunity that should be reviewed and rectified. The findings have broader ramifications for the non‐tokenistic and genuine involvement of poor and marginalized groups in the international policy‐making arena.     

The Self-determination of Indigenous Peoples and the Limits of United Nations Advocacy in Guerrero,Mexico (1998-2000)

This essay examines the visit to Mexico in February 2000 by Erica-Irene Daes, then chairperson of the United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Populations. I use the occasion of this visit to analyze the relationship between a regional indigenous organization in the state of Guerrero, the Mexican national state, and the United Nations within the larger context of the development of international law. I argue that the persistence today of a centuries-old bias in international law that privileges the "nation-state" and a related individualistic bias in the conception of human rights make UN support for indigenous self-determination highly equivocal. I begin with an examination of the Consejo Guerrerense and how its experience helps to illustrate the issues confronted by the indigenous rights movement in Mexico today. Then I provide background to place this movement and the United Nations in the context of the development of international and human rights law. The discourse of international human rights and the ways in which these rights are defined and advocated by the UN has serious limitations for Indians in Mexico. This is a cautionary tale about the real possibilities for social change in our global world.     

Public Support for International Human Rights Institutions: A Cross‐National and Multilevel Analysis

The expansion of international human rights institutions has drawn much attention. Bringing together theories from sociology, political science, and international law, this article examines what factors promote public support for international human rights institutions, using the recent wave of the World Values Survey data (2005–2008). The level of public support displays both cross‐national and cross‐individual variations, so I conceptualize it as a two‐level process and employ the multilevel modeling. At the individual level, it is found that men, younger people, and individuals with more education and income show a higher level of support. At the country level, national affluence, political change (de‐democratization), and linkage to the world society are associated with more support. I further integrate individual‐level characteristics and country‐level social contexts, and pay special attention to education. Education is the institutional link between macro‐level social influences and micro‐level individual attitudes. I find that the support‐promoting effect of education is contingent on social contexts. It is more salient in wealthy countries and countries with strong ties to the world society.     

Applying Complexity and Emergence in Social Work Education

Complexity theory provides social work educators, researchers, and evaluators with a promising approach for examining the concepts of interconnectedness, non‐linearity and emergence. This paper introduces complexity theory, provides an example in which a large international non‐governmental organization developed the capacity to address the issue of human trafficking, and discusses implications for applying this approach to social work education coursework. Social work applications of complexity range from understanding emerging social movements, to encouraging human rights and resiliency in target populations, to understanding the interdependencies of communities.     

Principles of Protection for Internally Displaced Persons

For forced migrants who have not left their country but are internally displaced persons, human rights law provides an important framework through which to analyse and address their plight. Two principal reasons underpin this assertion.
First, owing to the compelling need: human rights violations cut across all phases of internal displacement, causing its occurrence, characterizing the conditions of physical insecurity and material deprivation in which the internally displaced often find themselves, and impeding equitable and lasting solutions.
Second, as internally displaced persons remain within the territory of their state, refugee law does not apply and, instead, human rights law provides the fundamental basis for addressing their plight. In addition to human rights law, other standards of international law are also relevant, namely international humanitarian law when displacement occurs in situations of armed conflict and refugee law by analogy.
Drawing on these three standards of international law, Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement have been developed which set out what protection should mean for internally displaced persons in all phases of displacement. This article traces the origins and provides an overview of the content of the Guiding Principles, the text of which is reproduced in full in the Appendix.