COMMITTEE ON PROTECTION OF RIGHTS OF MIGRANTS OPENS FIFTH SESSION

The Committee on the Protection of Migrant Workers, which reviews the implementation of the provisions of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families by its 34 States parties, this morning opened its fifth session by hearing an address by a Representative of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, following which it adopted its agenda and programme of work.

The Committee was addressed by Alessio Bruni, a Representative of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, who emphasized that the Office of the High Commissioner was closely following developments and looking into ways and means of more active promotion of ratification of the Convention. The High Commissioner, in her opening statement to the second session of the Human Rights Council, had emphasized that the migration debate continued to be centred either on the perceived challenges posed by migration, or on its contribution to development and poverty alleviation, but that the inextricable connection of migration with human rights had yet to permeate discussions and policy. In that context, she had stated that the vulnerability of migrants to abuse should warrant a better understanding of their rights, as well as more – not less – protection.

Prasad Kariyawasam, Committee Chairperson, noted that the Committee would take up the initial report of Mexico at its current session, the second country report to be considered by the Committee. Last week he had attended the eighth Conference of National Human Rights Institutions in Bolivia, which had been jointly organized by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Government of Bolivia. He was pleased to report that national human rights institutions were taking the migration issue seriously, and he suggested the Committee look into ways to establish greater contacts with those institutions, building on the momentum of the Conference, in order to ensure a better implementation of the Convention.

Committee members then informed each other of the activities they had undertaken in connection with the promotion of the rights of migrant workers, in particular through participation in a number of international and regional conferences, since the last session of the Committee. Experts observed that the majority of destination countries for migrant workers were not parties to the Convention. Other Experts observed, however, that, given the labour shortage in Europe, countries of destination for migrant labour were becoming increasingly interested in engaging in the debate on migration, and realized its necessity.

Also this morning, the Committee heard the views of the Migration Forum, a university-based non-governmental organization that works on migration issues in Mexico, with regard to the Committee’s consideration of the initial report of Mexico (CMW/C/MEX/1), which it will take up when it reconvenes at 3 p.m. this afternoon.

Statement by the Representative of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

ALESSIO BRUNI, Representative of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, said that he would like to briefly inform the Committee of developments since its last session in April 2006. Of particular interest for treaty bodies was the Human Rights Council’s mandate to undertake a Universal Periodic Review of the fulfilment by each State of its human rights obligations and commitments. Among the achievements of the Council at its first session had been the draft International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, and of the draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which had been submitted to the General Assembly for adoption. Additionally, the Council had held two special sessions, on 5 and 6 July 2006, on the escalation of the situation in Palestine and the other occupied Arab territories; and on 11 August 2006, to consider the situation in Lebanon, in which it adopted a resolution condemning the grave Israeli violations of human rights and breaches of international humanitarian law and decided to establish and dispatch a commission of inquiry to Lebanon. That commission would submit its report to the third regular session of the Council at the end of November.

Mr. Bruni wished to mention another important event: the entry into force of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment on 22 June 2006. That was indeed a historic milestone in the fight against torture. Essentially, it would establish a system of regular visits to places of detention carried out by complementary international and national independent expert bodies. Upon ratifying or acceding to the Optional Protocol, States parties would be accepting unannounced visits to places of detention by those bodies.

Another important event, Mr. Bruni noted, was the final stage of the drafting of a Comprehensive and Integral International Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights and Dignity of Persons with Disabilities, on 25 August 2006. The forthcoming adoption of the draft Convention and its Optional Protocol by the General Assembly at its present session would constitute a crucial accomplishment in the field of human rights, and would address the often neglected rights of an estimated 10 per cent of the world’s population, or 650 million people.

On the reform of treaty bodies, in addition to the progress made at the Fifth Inter-Committee Meeting and the eighteenth meeting of treaty bodies chairpersons in June 2006, Mr. Bruni drew attention to the working group on treaty body reform that was scheduled for 28 and 29 November 2006, and reminded the Committee that it would need to nominate a representative to attend. On the same issue, he noted the initiative of the Government of Liechtenstein to hold an informal brainstorming meeting on the High Commissioner’s proposal for a unified standing treaty body from 14 to 16 July 2006 in Malbun. Representatives of regional groups, non-governmental organizations and national human rights institutions had attended that meeting. In order to allow further consultations and a proper focus on that issue, a two-day meeting was tentatively scheduled for February 2007 to allow States parties to meet again with the Chairpersons of treaty bodies.

As Members knew, the General Assembly had held its High-level Dialogue on International Migration and Development on 14 and 15 September. Mr. Bruni was pleased to report that attendance at the High-level Dialogue had been remarkable and that many references had been made to respect for human rights as the necessary foundation for the beneficial effects of migration on development to accrue. One of the issues that had been discussed was the creation of a Global Forum on Migration and Development, which Belgium had offered to host sometime next year.

In conclusion, Mr. Bruni emphasized that the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights was closely following developments and was looking into ways and means of more active promotion of ratification of the Convention. The High Commissioner, in her opening statement to the second session of the Human Rights Council, had emphasized that the migration debate continued to be centred either on the perceived challenges posed by migration or on its contribution to development and poverty alleviation, but that the inextricable connection of migration with human rights had yet to permeate discussions and policy. In that context, she had stated that the vulnerability of migrants to abuse should warrant a better understanding of their rights, as well as more – not less – protection, and she had called upon all States that had not yet done so to ratify the Migrant Workers Convention and to encourage other Governments to follow their example.

Statement by the Migration Forum on the Committee’s List of Issues to be Considered in the Context of the Presentation of Mexico’s Initial Report

FABIENNE VENET of the Migration Forum (Foro Migraciones), a university-based civil organization that works on migration issues in Mexico, said she wished to address issues concerning legal reforms, verification, the situation of women, girls and teenagers and victims of trafficking.

The flow of migrants was increasing. Most of them were in irregular situations and most of them were women and unaccompanied girls – who were in a particularly vulnerable situation. Multilateral cooperation on a regional and national level was needed to promote social development and not just economic growth, as part of a prevention and reduction strategy to reduce migration pressures. It was not by building walls of shame or investing in detention facilities that that could be done, Ms. Venet cautioned.

Regarding legislation to ensure the proper implementation of the Convention, Ms. Venet said that no progress had been seen so far. To do that the reservations to the Convention would need to be withdrawn, article 33 of the Constitution would have to be repealed, migration would need to be depenalized, and there would have to be proper trials for migrants. Finally, the need to take gender and age into consideration in migration issues was necessary. Migrants needed to have the right to a hearing before expulsion. In that connection, it was surprising that, in the context of revisions contemplated to migration legislation, the provision relating to the right to a hearing had been dropped in draft legislation presented to the legislature on the topic. Although consultations had been launched with civil society representatives over a year ago on this topic, nothing had been done. She called on the Committee to urge Mexico to thoroughly overhaul its immigration law; it was not possible to simple rework the existing machinery.

Turning to current legislation that affected migrants, Ms. Venet said Article 11 of the Mexican Constitution limited freedom of transit, and Article 9 limited the right of freedom of association for foreigners, in particular with regard to membership of trade unions and cooperatives. There was discrimination against women and girls in terms of protecting them against violence, as they were only seen as economic dependants under the law.

The establishment of the National Council to Prevent Discrimination did constitute progress, Ms. Venet said, but it was not enough. It was important to set up organizations that specifically targeted the issue of migrants and their rights to do that.

With regard to verification procedures for migrants, the involvement of the army and the navy was disturbing, Ms. Venet found, and it raised serious questions about the access to justice for migrants. Identification checks were illegal acts and perpetrated criminality and injustice in the system.

Detention procedures had improved, Ms. Venet observed. No longer were people being held for years, as in the past. However, the detention periods were still too long. For example, there were Central American nationals who had been held as long as two months. Of particular concern was the continued detention of minors – those under 18 – and alternatives to detention had to be found in such cases.

A system of legal representation for migrants needed to be established and greater consular involvement should be fostered, Ms. Venet said. In conclusion, there continued to be problems of access to social services for workers and there was a precarious situation for domestic workers, as well as other temporary workers, who were not covered by social security.

The Chairperson then asked whether the Forum wanted migration to be depenalized or decriminalized, noting that penalizing illegal immigration was not contrary to the Convention. Also, he wished to know if the conditions of detention were any different for migrants than for other citizens.

Responding, Ms. Venet said that it was the Forum’s view that migration should not be penalized. As to detention conditions, they were different for migrants and for regular citizens; furthermore, there could be no comparison between a migrant worker being held and a criminal suspect.