An Analysis of Home-State Obligations to International Migrants

Abstract

This Report argues for greater co-ordinated action within international human rights institutions to encourage diplomatic protection as a supplementary mode of human rights implementation and enforcement. This report underlines that diplomatic protection involves more than basic consular assistance, but rather can be broadly defined as any action taken by a State in response to internationally wrongful acts against its nationals while abroad. This includes a traditional category of action – underappreciated within international human rights law – the espousal of claims, whereby a home state can take action for redress, political, administrative or legal, on behalf of its citizen. While the international bill of human rights, in protecting the individual rather than the citizen, purports to offer migrants equal rights as nationals, it is simply a reality that migrants continue to lack accessible and effective mechanism for remedying violations of their rights at international level. Diplomatic Protection represents one of the ways in which states can ensure the effective implementation of Treaty commitments they are parties to, in particular it bears upon the obligation to co-operate with other States to prevent violations and the individual’s right to an effective remedy. This Report considers whether the long established discretion of home state governments to take action can, in certain circumstances, be construed as an obligation to take action.