In November 2010, U.N. High Commissioner for
Human Rights, Navi Pillay, remarked:
Although states have legitimate interests in securing
their borders and exercising immigration controls,
such concerns do not trump the obligations of the state
to respect the internationally guaranteed rights of all
persons (Pillay 2010).The proposition that there are internationally guar-
anteed rights of all persons is easier to say than to ap-
ply. The guarantees that apply to any particular case
depend greatly on the citizenship of the person con-
cerned. The obligations of and constraints on a state
(by treaty, customary international law, or domestic
law) govern, which vary widely from state-to-state.
At present, there is no internationally guaranteed
right to migrate from one state to another. Persons are
not free to move and shift allegiance unilaterally. A
strict and confining legal regime governs these things.
People cross borders and remain there—lawful-
ly—only by sufferance. Even a partial list of recent
treaties gives the impression that toleration for migra-
tion and respect for human rights are growing, which
as to obligated states parties is true, but customary in-
ternational law is less permissive. For example:
- International Convention on the Elimina-
tion of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
(1969); - International Covenant on Civil and Politi-
cal Rights (1976); - International Covenant on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights (1976); - Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination Against Women (1981); - Convention against Torture and Other