Committee on Rights of Migrant Workers Launches General Comment on the Convergence of the Migrant Workers’ Convention and the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration
The Committee on Migrant Workers today held an event to launch its general comment six on the convergent protection of the rights of migrant workers and members of their families through the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families and the Global Compact for safe, orderly and regular migration.
Fatimata Diallo, Committee Chair, in opening remarks, said migrants, especially those in an irregular situation, were disproportionately exposed to abuses and human rights violations, and often did not have access to due process or remedies. More than 8,900 people died on migration routes in 2024. Yet, the human rights dimensions of migration remained largely neglected, and inflammatory and xenophobic rhetoric against migrants helped politicians win votes.
Ms. Diallo said the Convention and the Global Compact were unique, complementary and mutually reinforcing to advance migration governance and promote and protect the rights of all migrants. General comment six offered avenues for the coordination of the convergent measures for protection of the rights of migrant workers and members of their families in the Convention and the Global Compact.
Peggy Hicks, Director, Thematic Engagement, Special Procedures and Right to Development Division, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said in opening remarks that general comment six was a milestone in international efforts to ensure that States aligned migration governance with international human rights obligations. Ms. Hicks called on all States, including those that had endorsed the Global Compact but had not yet ratified the Convention, to engage in dialogue on ratifying this important human rights instrument.
Introducing the general comment, Mohammed Charef, Committee Expert and Chair of the Committee’s Working Group on the Convention and the Global Compact, said the Convention and the Global Compact both called for the protection of migrants from human rights violations, measures to promote decent work and access to social security, and efforts to help migrants reach their potential. The general comment sought to help States parties to implement their commitments under these instruments and promote effective, tangible respect for the rights of migrants.
The Committee heard statements marking the launch of the general comment by panellists from Permanent Missions and United Nations agencies, before holding a general discussion on how the Convention and the Global Compact could be implemented in synergy.
In the discussion, speakers welcomed the adoption of general comment six, which they said assisted States in implementing their commitments under the Convention and the Global Compact and in managing migration with a human rights lens.
Speakers welcomed that the general comment promoted non-criminalisation of migration. States needed to adopt measures to combat the intolerance of migrants, particularly vulnerable persons, and to further facilitate regular migration, they said.
Speaking as panellists were Carlos D. Sorreta, Permanent Representative of the Philippines to the United Nations Office and Other International Organizations in Geneva; Fernando Espinosa Olivera, Deputy Permanent Representative of Mexico to the United Nations Office and Other International Organizations in Geneva; Abdellah Boutadghart, Deputy Permanent Representative of the Kingdom of Morocco to the United Nations Office and Other International Organizations in Geneva; Catalina Devandas, Senior Director, Office of Partnerships, Advocacy and Communications, International Organization for Migration; Gladys Cisneros, Chief of Branch, Labour Migration Unit, International Labour Organization; Patrick Eba, Deputy Director, Department of International Protection, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; Tasha Gill, Global Lead on Migration and Displacement, United Nations Children's Fund Regional Office for Europe and Central Asia; Jonathan Prentice, Head of the Secretariat, United Nations Network on Migration; Patrick Taran, President, Global Migration Policy Associates; Alan Desmond, Editor, Journal of Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Law, University of Leicester, United Kingdom; and Ariel Cejas Meliare, Procurador Penitenciario de la Nación [Procurator's Office of the Nation of Argentina].
Bangladesh, Honduras and Burkina Faso took the floor in the discussion.
The Committee on Migrant Worker’s fortieth session is being held from 7 to 17 April. All the documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, can be found on the session’s webpage. Meeting summary releases can be found here. The webcast of the Committee’s public meetings can be accessed via the UN Web TV webpage.
The Committee will next meet in public at 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, 17 April, to close its fortieth session.
Opening Remarks
FATIMATA DIALLO, Committee Chair, said currently, some 281 million people lived and worked in countries that were not their own. Migration was the symptom and effect of profound social, economic, and environmental pressures and changes around the world. Migrants, especially those in an irregular situation, were disproportionately exposed to abuses and human rights violations, and often did not have access to due process or remedies. As border controls had become stricter and regular pathways of entry and stay had narrowed, migrants' journeys had become longer, more fragmented and more dangerous. More than 40,000 women, men and children between 2014 and 2021 had been declared dead or missing en route, and countless other disappearances had never been reported. More than 8,900 people died on migration routes in 2024.
Yet, the human rights dimensions of migration remained largely neglected. The issue of migration was usually approached from the perspective of economic development or border security and control. Inflammatory and xenophobic rhetoric against migrants helped politicians win votes, and in times of crisis, the migrant was a convenient scapegoat to blame for social and economic hardship.
The Convention – a global legally binding instrument on migration – and the Global Compact – a non-binding instrument – were important international mechanisms in the context of migration. They were unique, complementary and mutually reinforcing to advance migration governance and promote and protect the rights of all migrants, regardless of their migration status.
The Global Compact was first and foremost a strategic policy instrument for guidance, which was nevertheless anchored in the norms and standards of international law. It was the most comprehensive migration governance instrument in the history of international migration, contributing to the protection of the various human rights of migrants and helping to operationalise the provisions of the Convention. It laid the groundwork for Member States to create a strategy that protected all migrants in vulnerable situations through a range of mechanisms, including the provision of regular access pathways.
The Convention, conversely, provided a comprehensive international legal framework for the promotion of the human rights of migrant workers and their family members, and remained the best strategy to prevent abuses and address the vulnerabilities that many migrants faced. It established minimum human rights standards, which were legally binding on States parties and applied to migrant workers and members of their families.
General comment six offered avenues for complementary coordination for the convergent protection of the rights of migrant workers and members of their families through the Convention and the Global Compact.
The ratification of treaties could have a transformative effect. Governments had used treaty provisions and treaty body recommendations to advance complex societal changes that faced resistance at the national level, such as adopting comprehensive non-discrimination legislation. Regrettably, none of the 27 European Union Member States had signed or ratified the Convention. Convincing these States to ratify was important, not only because the European Union was an important migrant destination, but also because they had robust democratic institutions and vibrant civil society activity, and could meaningfully implement and comply with the Convention. Ratification by European Union Member States would send a strong message of support for this core human rights instrument. It was time for the European Union and the Committee to engage in dialogue on the ratification of the Convention.
The Convention did not create new rights, besides a few exceptions, but incorporated the fundamental human rights set out in the main international human rights instruments, applying them to a vast and specific category of the world's population, namely migrant workers and members of their families. Ms. Diallo called on States to support the Committee’s ratification campaign.
PEGGY HICKS, Director, Thematic Engagement, Special Procedures and Right to Development Division, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said migration was the history of humanity. The worrying trend of dehumanising anti-migrant narratives, and securitised and punitive migration policies, limited access to safe migration pathways, while the criminalisation of solidarity was placing migrants and communities at heightened human rights risks. It was time to re-centre migration governance on human rights protection and strengthen international cooperation grounded in the dignity and rights of all people, regardless of migration status.
General comment six was a milestone in international efforts to ensure that States aligned migration governance with international human rights obligations. It illustrated the complementarity between the Convention and the Global Compact – each reinforcing and completing the other and constituting a bridge between soft law and treaty law, providing interpretative guidance for States to implement the Global Compact commitments consistently with international human rights standards.
The Global Compact was the first inter-governmentally negotiated agreement which covered all dimensions of international migration in a holistic and comprehensive manner. It respected States’ sovereign right to determine who entered and stayed in their territory and demonstrated commitment to international cooperation on migration. It presented a significant opportunity to improve governance of migration, to address the challenges associated with today’s migration, and to strengthen the contribution of migrants and migration to sustainable development. It also explicitly reinforced the importance of human rights and international law through its guiding principle on human rights and its commitment to the principles of non-regression and non-discrimination.
The Convention offered detailed and binding provisions that complemented and strengthened the Compact’s more aspirational commitments. On regularisation, for example, it provided concrete and binding guidance, requiring States parties to “take appropriate measures to ensure that [an irregular] situation did not persist” when migrant workers and members of their families were in an irregular situation within their territory, and stressed that States parties should consider adopting policies to prevent migrant workers and members of their families from falling into irregularity.
The Convention was currently the least ratified of the core international human rights treaties, with only 60 States parties. Increasing the number of ratifications of the Convention remained a top priority for the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. At the same time, many countries had accepted many of the standards enshrined in the Convention via the ratification of other human rights treaties, the provisions of which mirrored the core rights codified in the Convention.
Some of the recent work of the Committee highlighted the relevance of the Convention and the Committee’s work even to non-States parties, such as the joint general comments with the Committee on the Rights of the Child, which provided authoritative guidance that was equally applicable to all 196 States parties to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Ms. Hicks also applauded the Committee for elaborating two joint general comments with the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination on principles and guidelines for eradicating xenophobia towards migrants. The two draft general comments were already at an advanced stage and would be discussed at the current session.
As the international community worked towards the implementation of the Global Compact, there was now also momentum for States parties, with the support of the Committee and its partners, to increase the number of States parties to the Convention. The Convention had a unique role as the only binding global treaty focused on the rights of migrant workers and their families, with its principles echoed throughout the Global Compact.
Ms. Hicks encouraged the recognition that soft law and treaty law were not at odds, but rather mutually reinforcing. This general comment helped bridge the two and offered useful guidance to all States, regardless of the ratification status. She invited States to consider Convention obligations in future implementation and review processes, such as the International Migration Reviews, and called on all States, including those that had endorsed the Global Compact but had not yet ratified the Convention, to engage in a dialogue with the Committee and the Office of the High Commissioner to discuss the benefits of ratifying this important human rights instrument.
Statements Introducing the General Comment
MOHAMMED CHAREF, Committee Expert and Chair of the Committee’s Working Group on the Convention and the Global Compact, called on all parties to carefully read the general comment, disseminate it and support its implementation. In many countries, there were reports of serious and repeated violations of the rights of migrant workers, which had direct consequences on the most vulnerable among them. Despite the alarmist discourse that was often used regarding migrant workers, there were many success stories associated with migration in the business, sport, music and science fields. Human rights needed to be put at the heart of discussions concerning migrant workers.
States needed to commit to their international obligations. The Convention and the Global Compact had convergent goals, though only the former was binding. Both instruments were rooted in values such as State sovereignty and respect for human rights. They called for the protection of migrants from human rights violations such as trafficking and measures to promote decent work and access to social security. Both instruments called for efforts to help migrants reach their potential.
The general comment was based on broad-ranging consultations with civil society and stakeholders in Geneva and around the world. It sought to help States parties to implement their commitments under the Global Compact and to strengthen migration governance. The general comment sought to promote effective and tangible respect for the rights of migrants. Mr. Charef praised the efforts of champion countries of the Convention and called on States that had not yet ratified it to do so. Ratification issues were more of a political nature than a legal one. The Committee would continue to encourage actors to promote the ratification of the Convention.
The Global Compact and the Convention were two essential instruments for promoting the rights of migrant workers. The Committee would promote their implementation and help build a brighter future for migrants around the world.
EDGAR CORZO SOSA, Committee Expert and Member of the Committee’s Working Group on the Convention and the Global Compact, said the general comment juxtaposed two different instruments that needed to complement each other, rather than be put against each other. One of its main goals was to provide authoritative guidance on how States could meet their obligations under these two instruments. The general comment did not water down the human rights standards developed by the Committee, but rather built on them. Safe, orderly and regular migration was a goal that could not be reached if human rights were left behind. In the general comment, the Committee identified 14 common points between the two instruments, relating to topics such as decent work, returns, remittances, childhood, family, gender, protection, defence and trafficking in persons.
The general comment provided a vision of migration governance that fully respected human rights. The Committee would do its part in periodic reviews to promote its implementation. It would hold a meeting with States in future to assess the impact that the general comment was having on human rights, and was calling on civil society to help disseminate it.
Panel Statements
CARLOS D. SORRETA, Permanent Representative of the Philippines to the United Nations Office and Other International Organizations in Geneva, thanked the Committee for its work on general comment six. There were over 10 million Filipinos working in almost all regions of the world. The Philippines promoted effective and fair governance of migration. The State party aimed to safeguard the rights of all migrant workers and establish legal pathways to migration. It had instituted a stringent anti-human trafficking law and had established gender-responsive mechanisms for migrants in distress in host countries.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Philippines facilitated the return of over a million Filipinos. It had passed laws allowing for dual citizenship and absentee voting, and developed a programme for enticing entrepreneurs and professionals to return to the State. Most countries with which the Philippines negotiated with to protect its migrants were not parties to the Convention or the Global Compact. However, there were normative baselines that these States needed to uphold. Over the years, protections for migrants had increased, influenced by these two instruments.
FERNANDO ESPINOSA OLIVERA, Deputy Permanent Representative of Mexico to the United Nations Office and Other International Organizations in Geneva, said there was back-peddling on human rights and discriminatory discourse against migrants worldwide. In this context, international agreements concerning migrants were very important. Mexico had led the creation of international frameworks, including the Global Compact, that guaranteed the respect of migrants and promoted secure, orderly, regular and humane migration. Mexico welcomed general comment six, which was the product of broad consultations. It would help to bring greater consistency in efforts to protect migrants.
There were several commonalities between the Convention and the Global Compact. Mexico had developed State agencies and policies for caring for migrants abroad and supporting their reintegration, as well as tools for collecting data on migrants. The governance of migration was only possible when it respected human rights. All States needed to adopt constructive approaches and respect their obligations in the field of human rights and international law.
ABDELLAH BOUTADGHART, Deputy Permanent Representative of the Kingdom of Morocco to the United Nations Office and Other International Organizations in Geneva, said the general comment was the product of a long and transparent process. Morocco hailed the Committee’s efforts to seek inputs from States on the general comment. Currently, migrants around the work were facing xenophobia and violations of their rights. The general comment would support efforts to protect their rights.
Morocco had developed a strategy to promote the rights of migrants on its territory. It had regularised the status of many irregular migrants and supported their access to State services. The Government sought to ensure that migrants could enjoy their rights. It had helped over 8,000 citizens of African countries seeking to return to their home countries to do so. Morocco shouldered its responsibilities in terms of border management and combatting trafficking in persons. States were obliged to ensure that the general comment was a success, and to develop policies on migration that were based on facts rather than disinformation.
CATALINA DEVANDAS, Senior Director, Office of Partnerships, Advocacy and Communications, International Organization for Migration, said around 60 per cent of migrants were migrant workers. Migrant workers constituted 4.7 per cent of the global workforce. Over 650 billion United States dollars were sent in remittances to low and middle-income countries in 2024. Remittances were key to development and reducing poverty.
The general comment promoted the benefits of safe and orderly migration and equal treatment in employment for migrant workers. It called for key actors, including migrants themselves, to be included in conversations on migration policies and for migrants to be direct beneficiaries of these policies. Despite the ongoing challenges, the past few decades had seen immense progress in the protection of the rights of migrants and the promotion of the benefits of migration for all. The Convention and the Global Compact were two examples of this progress, and the general comment was an important tool for breathing new life into these instruments.
GLADYS CISNEROS, Chief of Branch, Labour Migration Unit, International Labour Organization, said migrant workers were three times more likely to be in situations of forced labour. Exploitation of migrant workers generated some 30 billion dollars in profits each year. In many countries, migrant workers faced legal and practical barriers to freedom of association. These examples highlighted the urgent need for the protection of migrant workers’ rights.
Many International Labour Organization Conventions supplemented the rights guaranteed by the Global Compact and the Convention. The International Labour Organization hoped to continue its collaboration with the Committee, and the Global Compact provided a crucial framework for this collaboration. It guided States parties in the implementation of the Global Compact and the Convention. States and civil society needed to closely study the general comment and make use of it to ensure the implementation of the Global Compact and the Convention.
TASHA GILL, Global Lead on Migration and Displacement, United Nations Children's Fund Regional Office for Europe and Central Asia, said the general comment emphasised protecting children from statelessness by ensuring that all births were registered. It promoted family reunification for migrant workers and their families and the protection of children’s rights at borders. Further, the general comment called for the establishment of safeguards to ensure that migrant children could attend school, highlighting the risks of child labour. Many children were left behind when their parents left their countries to work. The general comment called for policies to support these children.
JONATHAN PRENTICE, Head of the Secretariat, United Nations Network on Migration, said the Global Compact outlined the ways in which safe and orderly migration could be achieved and recognised the need to review progress in its implementation on a periodic basis. The Committee needed to exert further efforts to promote the implementation of the Global Compact and the general comment. The Global Compact had a long way to go before it was fully realised, but its existence and potential were not to be underestimated.
PATRICK TARAN, President, Global Migration Policy Associates, saluted the sixtieth ratification of the Convention by Zimbabwe. This was a milestone achievement. In addition to the 60 States parties, there were also 11 States that had signed the Convention but had yet to ratify it. Demand for skilled labour was growing worldwide. Migrants and migration were worth nine trillion dollars to the global economy. However, pushbacks against the rights of migrants continued. The Convention and the Global Compact were complementary only when States had ratified both. No country could be a champion of migrant workers’ rights until they had ratified the Convention.
The death rate for migrant workers at work was at least three times the rate for migrants in transit. Foreign workers were at least twice as likely as nationals to die at work in European Union Member States. These deaths were a result of the lack of implementation of the standards of the Convention. There needed to be a joint general comment on the complementarity of the Convention and the two International Labour Organization Conventions that addressed migrant workers. The global campaign for ratification of the Convention needed to be rejuvenated. With more resources, the Committee could achieve at least 100 ratifications by 2030.
United Nations Women said the general comment provided clarity on States’ obligations under the Global Compact and the Convention. At every stage of migration, women’s rights were non-negotiable. Harmful narratives needed to be combatted, and migration pathways needed to be made safe for women. Migrant women regularly faced human rights violations and threats en route. States needed to promote the participation of migrant women in policy development, strengthen protections for migrant women, and promote their access to work. United Nations Women would help States to convert their commitments into transformative action for migrants.
ALAN DESMOND, Editor, Journal of Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Law, University of Leicester, United Kingdom, said the general comment would be of great use in ensuring that States that had ratified the Global Compact and the Convention implemented their obligations, and in raising awareness of the Convention. The two instruments were not identical, and it was important for States to fully implement both. Remittances were a vital source of income for migrant families and they helped to promote economic development. Migrants often had to pay disproportionate transaction fees, sometimes as much as 10 per cent. International commitments had been developed to reduce remittance costs. The Convention and the Global Compact conferred on migrant workers the right to send remittances and on States the obligation to facilitate such remittances. The holistic implementation of the two instruments would help to support migrants’ ability to send remittances, among other rights.
Poor sound quality prevented interpretation of the statement made by ARIEL CEJAS MELIARE, Procurador Penitenciario de la Nación [Procurator's Office of the Nation of Argentina].
Discussion
In the ensuing discussion, speakers welcomed the adoption of general comment six, which assisted States in implementing their commitments under the Convention and the Global Compact and would help States to manage migration with a human rights lens. Migration governance called for a coherent vision. Speakers welcomed that the general comment promoted non-criminalisation of migration. States needed to adopt measures to combat the intolerance of migrants, particularly vulnerable persons, and to further facilitate regular migration, they said.
Speakers presented policies to promote orderly migration, naturalise irregular migrants, and combat trafficking in persons and statelessness. They also congratulated the Committee on its efforts to promote the rights of migrant workers.
Concluding Remarks
CARLOS D. SORRETA, Permanent Representative of the Philippines to the United Nations Office and Other International Organizations in Geneva, said the Philippines was developing an initiative to strengthen social stability and access to medical services for migrants. This would help improve the situation of migrants abroad and when they returned home. The State was calling on receiving countries to join the Convention. Migrants had a transformative effect on the countries in which they worked. Countries that had in the past criminalised Filipino migrant workers whose rights were violated by employers were now holding such employers to account. This trend needed to continue.
ABDELLAH BOUTADGHART, Deputy Permanent Representative of the Kingdom of Morocco to the United Nations Office and Other International Organizations in Geneva, said that there was a need to ground migration policy in evidence, away from xenophobic discourse. It was welcome to hear the strong support for this approach from all speakers.
MOHAMMED CHAREF, Committee Expert and Chair of the Committee’s Working Group on the Convention and the Global Compact, said he was moved by the support expressed for the general comment by participants. During these challenging times, there needed to be collaboration between all parties to address migrant workers’ complex situation and support them.
EDGAR CORZO SOSA, Committee Expert and Member of the Committee’s Working Group on the Convention and the Global Compact, said the Committee would spare no effort to promote the implementation of the general comment, and ensure that the good standards and practices established in the Convention and the Global Compact were implemented around the world.
FATIMATA DIALLO, Committee Chair, said the Committee hoped that the general comment would be a roadmap for States parties to improve protections for migrants and migrant workers. It would take into consideration all comments made by participants and work to disseminate the general comment through its outreach activities. It hoped that the general comment would contribute to promoting the protection of migrant workers across the world.
___________
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
CMW25.005E