Después de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, luego de la adopción de la Carta de las Naciones Unidas de 1945 y la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos de 1948, diferentes regiones desarrollaron sus propios sistemas de instrumentos y mecanismos legales regionales. Estos instrumentos regionales reflejan las normas internacionales de derechos humanos, al tiempo que incluyen perspectivas regionales.
Después de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, tras la aprobación de la Carta de las Naciones Unidas en 1945 y la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos en 1948, diferentes regiones elaboraron sus propios sistemas de instrumentos jurídicos y mecanismos regionales. Estos instrumentos regionales recogen las normas internacionales de derechos humanos, pero incluyen también una perspectiva regional.
África
List
List 7. Regional instruments and mechanisms for human rights protection in Africa
| Regional instruments | |
|---|---|
| Mechanisms for human rights protection |
|
Note: This list is not exhaustive.
The African Commission on Human Rights was established as a supervisory body to promote and protect human rights. Its findings are not binding as such, but States should respect them given their obligation under article 1 to give effect to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Among other findings, the Commission has found that mass expulsion of aliens and unlawful deportations violate article 18. There has been compliance with the Charter in at least some instances (Viljoen and Louw, 2007).
The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights has jurisdiction to deal with disputes and to provide advice regarding the African human rights instruments that States have ratified. The Court may receive cases filed by:
- The African Commission of Human and Peoples’ Rights;
- States parties to the Protocol;
- African intergovernmental organizations;
- NGOs with observer status before the African Commission, and
- Individuals (only against States that have recognized the jurisdiction of the court).
Case Study
African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights ruling on a case of deprivation of nationality
In a case filed by an individual, the applicant claimed to have been arbitrarily deprived of his Tanzanian nationality by the Tanzanian authorities and arbitrarily expelled to Kenya. There, he was considered as an irregular migrant and consequently had to live in the transit zone between both countries in alleged inhuman and degrading conditions. The African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights sustained the claims and importantly concluded that:
- The burden of proof to show that an individual is not a citizen lies with the State;
- The applicant’s situation, in being rejected as a national by both the United Republic of Tanzania and Kenya, makes him a stateless person as defined by the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons;
- Even if the applicant would have been a migrant, his deportation by the United Republic of Tanzania was in violation of the law since he was not given the right to due process.
Fuente
African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Anudo Ochieng Anudo v. United Republic of Tanzania, 2018.
There are also instruments and mechanisms focused on freedom of movement. For example, at the regional level, the African Union Protocol to the Abuja Treaty relating to free movement (2018) regulates the free movement of persons, right of residence and right of establishment. Other instruments and mechanisms operate at the subregional level.
List
List 8. Subregional instruments guaranteeing freedom of movement in Africa and mechanisms for accountability
| Subregional instruments | |
|---|---|
| Mechanisms for accountability of subregional instruments |
Note: This list is not exhaustive.
América
List
List 9. Regional instruments and mechanisms for human rights protection in the Americas
| Regional instruments | |
|---|---|
| Mechanisms for human rights protection |
Note: This list is not exhaustive.
Both the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) can consider complaints.
The IACHR is a quasi-judicial body, and its work revolve around three main pillars:
- The individual petition system;
- Monitoring the human rights situation in the Member States;
- Attending to priority thematic areas.
The IACHR also established a Rapporteurship on the Rights of Migrants. The mandate of this rapporteur is to guarantee the rights of migrants and their families, asylum seekers, refugees, stateless persons, victims of human trafficking, internally displaced persons and other vulnerable groups of people in the context of human mobility. The findings and recommendations of the IACHR are non-binding on Member States.
The mandate of the IACtHR includes considering and deciding on cases brought to it against the Member States that have specifically accepted the Court’s jurisdiction. Those cases must be processed first by the Commission. Only States parties and the Commission may refer cases to the Court. The Commission can also address the Court for advisory opinions. Individuals, however, have no standing. Most importantly, the judgments of the Court are binding on States parties.
To Go Further
Some of the advisory opinions of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights relevant for international migration law (IML) include the following:
Under the Citizenship Statute, citizens of MERCOSUR have the right to free movement, residence and employment in MERCOSUR Member States and in the five associated countries. Labour laws and social welfare systems are also harmonized between Member States.
Europa
List
List 10. Regional instruments and mechanisms for human rights protection in Europe
|
COUNCIL OF EUROPE |
EUROPEAN UNION |
|
| Regional instruments |
|
|
| Mechanisms for human rights protection |
|
|
Note: This list is not exhaustive.
In Europe, two systems are relevant for international migration law (IML): the Council of Europe and the European Union.
The European Council
The Council of Europe (CoE) consists of 47 States parties to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). ECHR guarantees civil and political rights and applies to everyone under the jurisdiction of Member States. It has been incorporated into the legal system of many States parties, and so it is binding on Member States through domestic law.
The enforcement of ECHR is overseen by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).
In its almost 50 years, ECtHR has ruled on many cases of migrants alleging rights violations under ECHR. A considerable number of rulings have shed light on whether the return of a migrant would constitute a violation of specific rights protected under the ECHR. These include:
- The right to life;
- The right to a fair hearing;
- The right to respect for private and family life;
- The prohibition against torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
- Slavery and forced labour;
- Collective expulsion.
The ECtHR has also considered allegations by migrants of arbitrary and unlawful detention.
The (revised) European Social Charter (ESC) is another CoE treaty that guarantees social and economic rights for everyone without discrimination on grounds of race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin. The ESC is monitored by the European Committee of Social Rights, which manages the system by which States report on their commitment to ESC. The Committee evaluates the reports and publishes conclusions, which are then reflected in the respective resolutions by the CoE Committee of Ministers. It is also empowered to hear collective – not individual – complaints against States that have accepted this procedure. The Committee issues decisions regarding these collective complaints.
The European Committee on Social Rights has considered whether migrants in an irregular situation are excluded or not from the Charter’s rights. It has concluded that some of the rights are “of fundamental importance to the individual since [they are] connected to the right to life itself”, and as such, they apply to irregular migrants as well.
Example
Fundamental rights in the European Social Charter applicable to migrants, irrespective of status
These include:
- The right to health (article 11 of the European Committee of Social Rights [ECSR]). See International Federation of Human Rights Leagues v. France (ECSR, 2004), para. 30–32;
- The right not to be deprived of shelter (article 16);
- The obligation to “provide protection and special aid from the State for children and young persons temporarily or definitively deprived of their family’s support”. See Defence for Children (DCI) International v. Belgium (ECSR, 2012), para. 136.
European Union
The European Union is an economic and political arrangement between 28 Member States. The Lisbon Treaty establishes the rules on the structure and functioning of the European Union, while the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union creates European Union citizenship and provides for the political, social and economic rights of citizens. European Union citizenship entails the freedom to move, live and work in another Member State and enjoy the same civil, socioeconomic and political rights as the nationals of that country.
One of the main achievements of the European Union is the Schengen Area, which abolishes internal borders. However, if there is a serious threat to public policy or internal security, a Schengen country may exceptionally reintroduce border control at its internal borders for, in principle, a limited period of no more than 30 days. The Schengen Agreement (CISA) extends the freedom of movement beyond European Union Member States to a few other States that are also party to the agreement. It benefits nationals and residents of the Schengen Member States, as well as non-nationals of a number of defined countries. A number of other instruments have been added to CISA, aiming to ensure harmonization of migration and asylum regulations among Member States.
To Go Further
Today, the European Union has developed a large set of rules on migration and asylum, including:
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has two main functions. The first is to interpret European Union law and settle legal disputes between national governments and European Union institutions. The second function is that, in certain circumstances, it can be used by individuals, companies or organizations to take action against a European Union institution for alleged violations of their rights as recognized by European Union law.
Individuals may file complaints to national courts, and the national court may then refer the case to CJEU for interpretation of the European Union law.
CJEU has made a number of important judgements in the field of migration, such as judgements regarding the right to family life, the right to return and the best interests of the child.
Case Study
Ruling on the legality of removal
In the case of Abdida (CJEU, 2014), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled on both the European Union Qualification Directive and the European Union Returns Directive. Mr Abdida, a Nigerian national diagnosed with AIDS, submitted an application to the Belgian State requesting a leave to remain due to medical reasons, but he was refused such a leave. Through domestic litigation, the case was referred to CJEU.
The CJEU concluded that an application under national legislation granting leave to remain due to a serious illness, coupled with a lack of treatment in the country of origin, does not constitute a claim for international protection within the meaning of article 2 (g) of the Qualification Directive. However, CJEU – quoting also the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) jurisprudence in the case of N. v. the United Kingdom (ECtHR, 2008) – affirmed that in exceptional cases, the removal of a third-country national suffering from a serious illness to a country in which appropriate treatment is not available may infringe the principle of non-refoulement and result in a violation of article 5 on non-refoulement of the European Union Returns Directive, which includes “the state of health of the third-country national concerned”.
Asia
A diferencia de Europa, África y América, la región de Asia y el Pacífico no tiene un sistema intergubernamental de toda la región (con tratados, tribunales, comisiones u otras instituciones) que posea el mandato de proteger y promover los derechos humanos. Sin embargo, a nivel subregional se han adoptado medidas para fortalecer esos derechos, lo que indica que está surgiendo un sistema de derechos humanos.
La Asociación de Naciones de Asia Sudoriental (ASEAN) ha liderado los esfuerzos por promover el respeto, la protección y el cumplimiento de los derechos humanos entre sus miembros. En 2012 se aprobó la Declaración de Derechos Humanos de la ASEAN (disponible en inglés), tras el establecimiento de la Comisión Intergubernamental de la ASEAN sobre los Derechos Humanos (sitio web en inglés) en 2009. La Declaración se basa también en la Carta de la ASEAN (disponible en inglés), que insta a establecer un órgano de derechos humanos (artículo 14). Las esferas prioritarias de la Comisión Intergubernamental en materia de derechos humanos se recogen en el Plan de Trabajo Quinquenal. La Comisión celebra al menos dos reuniones ordinarias por año, y rinde informes a los ministros de relaciones exteriores de la ASEAN.
A diferencia de otras regiones, Asia y el Pacífico no tiene un sistema judicial regional. La función de la Comisión Intergubernamental se concentra en crear conciencia y mejorar la capacidad, y no en vigilar o garantizar el cumplimiento.
Además, las naciones insulares del Pacífico están estableciendo órganos de derechos humanos con arreglo a sus necesidades y circunstancias específicas. Creado en 1996, el Foro de Instituciones Nacionales de Derechos Humanos de la Región de Asia y el Pacífico (APF) (sitio web en inglés), junto con las instituciones que lo componen y las organizaciones asociadas, procura apoyar a los distintos sistemas de protección de derechos humanos que existen en la región y colaborar con ellos.
To Go Further
- Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Human Rights Declaration, 2012.
- ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), Terms of Reference, 2009.
- AICHR, Five Year Work Plan: 2021–2025, 2020.
- The Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions.
Medio Oriente y África Septentrional
Tras los levantamientos de 2010 en la región del Medio Oriente y África Septentrional, ha habido en los últimos años iniciativas encaminadas a reformar el sistema de la Liga de los Estados Árabes, incluido el régimen de derechos humanos. Estas iniciativas han sido dirigidas por la Liga y algunos Estados partes en la Carta Árabe de Derechos Humanos, y por la sociedad civil. Por ejemplo, en 2014, la Liga aprobó el Estatuto de la Corte Árabe de Derechos Humanos (que aún no ha entrado en vigor), para crear un órgano judicial regional interestatal que resolviera las denuncias de violaciones de los derechos humanos con arreglo a la Carta. Un proceso parecido condujo a la versión revisada de la Carta Árabe de Derechos Humanos en 2004.
El Comité de Expertos en Derechos Humanos, compuesto por siete miembros, recibe informes periódicos de los Estados partes para vigilar la aplicación de la Carta Árabe de Derechos Humanos revisada de 2004. Sin embargo, este Comité no tiene el mandato de recibir peticiones de los Estados partes o de particulares en relación con violaciones de la Carta.
To Go Further
- Arab Charter on Human Rights, 2004.
Mensajes clave
- Las distintas regiones han establecido mecanismos para promover y proteger los derechos humanos. Algunos de estos mecanismos son más completos y robustos y cuentan con tratados y tribunales (África, América y Europa), mientras que otros están en proceso de desarrollo (Asia, el Pacífico, Medio Oriente y África Septentrional).
- Los sistemas regionales procuran, o deberían procurar, alinearse con las normas internacionales de derechos humanos. Por lo tanto, si bien incluyen sus perspectivas regionales, son de interés para el derecho internacional sobre migración.