Pub Date : 2022-04-01DOI: 10.1163/22131035-11010001
Alexander Fowler, Mohamed Radan
Libya’s Law No. 4 of 1978, which authorised the confiscation of real estate from private owners and its redistribution to other needy citizens, reflected elements of a long debate at the international level about the human right to property. This article examines Law No. 4 against Libya’s obligations under international law and finds that it led to violations of the right to property for which redress still remains outstanding today. Noting also the extensive violations of property rights and displacement in Libya due to civil conflict since 2011, as well as previous ineffective efforts at transitional justice, the article argues for a new concerted attempt at a comprehensive property claims mechanism applying the Pinheiro Principles and complementary international instruments within a broad-ranging transitional justice process. More broadly, Libya’s experience lends weight to calls for encapsulating the right to real property in multilateral treaty form.
{"title":"Violations of the Right to Property in Libya and the Promise of Transitional Justice","authors":"Alexander Fowler, Mohamed Radan","doi":"10.1163/22131035-11010001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-11010001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Libya’s Law No. 4 of 1978, which authorised the confiscation of real estate from private owners and its redistribution to other needy citizens, reflected elements of a long debate at the international level about the human right to property. This article examines Law No. 4 against Libya’s obligations under international law and finds that it led to violations of the right to property for which redress still remains outstanding today. Noting also the extensive violations of property rights and displacement in Libya due to civil conflict since 2011, as well as previous ineffective efforts at transitional justice, the article argues for a new concerted attempt at a comprehensive property claims mechanism applying the Pinheiro Principles and complementary international instruments within a broad-ranging transitional justice process. More broadly, Libya’s experience lends weight to calls for encapsulating the right to real property in multilateral treaty form.","PeriodicalId":13730,"journal":{"name":"International Human Rights Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45082169","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-30DOI: 10.1163/22131035-11010003
Hojjat Salimi Turkamani
One of the most important principles of asylum law is the principle of non- refoulement whereby a refugee should not be returned to his/her home country where his /her life or liberty would be at risk. Although this principle is not explicitly recognised in the European Convention on Human Rights (echr), the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), as oversight judicial mechanism of the convention, in its jurisprudence, with its extensive interpretation of Article 3 of the Convention, has made refugees subject to human rights protections. Some Iranians, knowing the importance of this article and the role of the Court in ensuring its observance, seek refuge in European states and eventually recourse to the Court alleging a breach of Article 3 obligations if extradited by a European state. The main question of this article is what is the court’s approach to the reasons for the Iranians’ asylum applications? Case by case study shows that religious, sexual and political reasons are the main reasons for Iranians seeking asylum and the Court has taken a low threshold for religious causes and taken an easy approach, while it has taken a strict approach to sexual and political causes with high thresholds.
{"title":"The European Court of Human Rights’ Approach to Causes of Iranians’ Asylum Applications in the light of Non- Refoulement Principle","authors":"Hojjat Salimi Turkamani","doi":"10.1163/22131035-11010003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-11010003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 One of the most important principles of asylum law is the principle of non- refoulement whereby a refugee should not be returned to his/her home country where his /her life or liberty would be at risk. Although this principle is not explicitly recognised in the European Convention on Human Rights (echr), the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), as oversight judicial mechanism of the convention, in its jurisprudence, with its extensive interpretation of Article 3 of the Convention, has made refugees subject to human rights protections. Some Iranians, knowing the importance of this article and the role of the Court in ensuring its observance, seek refuge in European states and eventually recourse to the Court alleging a breach of Article 3 obligations if extradited by a European state. The main question of this article is what is the court’s approach to the reasons for the Iranians’ asylum applications? Case by case study shows that religious, sexual and political reasons are the main reasons for Iranians seeking asylum and the Court has taken a low threshold for religious causes and taken an easy approach, while it has taken a strict approach to sexual and political causes with high thresholds.","PeriodicalId":13730,"journal":{"name":"International Human Rights Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43867846","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-03-24DOI: 10.1163/22131035-11010002
R. McQuigg
On 8 July 2021, in Tkhelidze v. Georgia, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) added to its growing body of jurisprudence on domestic abuse. This case is noteworthy as being the first decision of the ECtHR on this issue since the Grand Chamber issued its judgment in Kurt v. Austria, the only domestic abuse case to date which has been heard by the Grand Chamber. In its judgment, the Grand Chamber set out a number of general principles to be applied in such cases, and these principles were subsequently applied in Tkhelidze. The decision in Tkhelidze also highlighted that a procedural breach of article 2 can be established by a lack of an effective investigation into the failings of state authorities to respond sufficiently to domestic abuse.
{"title":"Tkhelidze v. Georgia: Domestic Abuse and the European Court of Human Rights","authors":"R. McQuigg","doi":"10.1163/22131035-11010002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-11010002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 On 8 July 2021, in Tkhelidze v. Georgia, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) added to its growing body of jurisprudence on domestic abuse. This case is noteworthy as being the first decision of the ECtHR on this issue since the Grand Chamber issued its judgment in Kurt v. Austria, the only domestic abuse case to date which has been heard by the Grand Chamber. In its judgment, the Grand Chamber set out a number of general principles to be applied in such cases, and these principles were subsequently applied in Tkhelidze. The decision in Tkhelidze also highlighted that a procedural breach of article 2 can be established by a lack of an effective investigation into the failings of state authorities to respond sufficiently to domestic abuse.","PeriodicalId":13730,"journal":{"name":"International Human Rights Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47962981","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-13DOI: 10.1163/22131035-10020007
{"title":"Contents","authors":"","doi":"10.1163/22131035-10020007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-10020007","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":13730,"journal":{"name":"International Human Rights Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42717900","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-13DOI: 10.1163/22131035-10020006
Manisuli Ssenyonjo
In recent years there has been a significant increase in trafficking in human beings as a global phenomenon. COVID-19 pandemic created conditions that increased the number of persons who were vulnerable to human trafficking and disrupted current and planned anti-trafficking initiatives. Human trafficking treats human beings as commodities to be bought and sold and put to forced labour often for lower or no payment. This constitutes a modern form of de facto slavery, servitude and forced or compulsory labour. This article provides an overview of international law on human trafficking and considers response to human trafficking in Africa. It further considers whether diplomats can be held accountable for exploitation of migrant domestic workers in receiving States. It further examines whether diplomatic immunity can be used as a bar to the exercise of jurisdiction by domestic courts and tribunals of a state which hosts the diplomat (the ‘receiving state’) in cases of employment of a trafficked person by a former or serving diplomat. It ends by considering whether trafficked persons should be held to bear individual criminal responsibility for crimes they have committed (or were compelled to commit) in the course, or as a direct consequence, of having been trafficked. Such crimes may include unlawful entry into, presence or residence in another country of transit or destination, working without a work permit, sex work, and use of false identity/false passport.
{"title":"Human Trafficking in the Context of Global Migration: Modern Manifestation of De Facto Slavery, Servitude and Forced or Compulsory Labour","authors":"Manisuli Ssenyonjo","doi":"10.1163/22131035-10020006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-10020006","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000In recent years there has been a significant increase in trafficking in human beings as a global phenomenon. COVID-19 pandemic created conditions that increased the number of persons who were vulnerable to human trafficking and disrupted current and planned anti-trafficking initiatives. Human trafficking treats human beings as commodities to be bought and sold and put to forced labour often for lower or no payment. This constitutes a modern form of de facto slavery, servitude and forced or compulsory labour. This article provides an overview of international law on human trafficking and considers response to human trafficking in Africa. It further considers whether diplomats can be held accountable for exploitation of migrant domestic workers in receiving States. It further examines whether diplomatic immunity can be used as a bar to the exercise of jurisdiction by domestic courts and tribunals of a state which hosts the diplomat (the ‘receiving state’) in cases of employment of a trafficked person by a former or serving diplomat. It ends by considering whether trafficked persons should be held to bear individual criminal responsibility for crimes they have committed (or were compelled to commit) in the course, or as a direct consequence, of having been trafficked. Such crimes may include unlawful entry into, presence or residence in another country of transit or destination, working without a work permit, sex work, and use of false identity/false passport.","PeriodicalId":13730,"journal":{"name":"International Human Rights Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47811559","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-29DOI: 10.1163/22131035-10020002
J. Sarkin
Too little is provided, not only in international law, but also by the United Nations, for victims around the world. This article therefore argues that a new paradigm is needed. It uses the conflict in Syria since 2011, specifically focusing on how enforced disappearances and arbitrary detentions have been used, to examine these questions. It has been reported that at least 150,000 people have been affected by these practices, but the number may be as high as a million. Because the state has used these practices methodically, they amount to a widespread and systemic attack on the civilian population and, therefore, to crimes against humanity. While the Syrian regime is primarily responsible, non-state actors have also been committing these types of crimes. The article discusses the general processes that have been set up to deal with the conflict in international law and by the United Nations in places like Syria. It finds that very little has been done to end the conflict in Syria, other than mediation. The article then reviews the international processes dealing with disappearances and detentions in Syria that families can report to, and the role these institutions have played so far. It again finds that very little has been achieved. The article also examines other countries where processes have been set up to deal with missing and disappeared persons, such as Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Cyprus, and Georgia, to learn the lessons from these past processes for the Syrian situation. It is argued that, generally when mass atrocities occur, the UN on rare occasions will create an accountability process, but never creates a process that focuses on the needs of victims: finding their loved ones, getting them released from custody if they are alive, or finding the truth about what happened to them and where their remains are. The article therefore argues that a new mechanism is needed for Syria (but also for other places) to get people released, and to find information on others whose whereabouts are unknown due to the conflict and/or the mass human rights abuses. It contends that the mechanism could be set up by the UN, and if not, by a regional actor such as the European Union, or by several states. It is reasoned that the mechanism ought to have a Board made up of a representative each from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP), the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID), the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions (WGAD) and a Syrian organisation, elected each year.
{"title":"The Need for a New Paradigm in International Law to Provide International Protection","authors":"J. Sarkin","doi":"10.1163/22131035-10020002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-10020002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Too little is provided, not only in international law, but also by the United Nations, for victims around the world. This article therefore argues that a new paradigm is needed. It uses the conflict in Syria since 2011, specifically focusing on how enforced disappearances and arbitrary detentions have been used, to examine these questions. It has been reported that at least 150,000 people have been affected by these practices, but the number may be as high as a million. Because the state has used these practices methodically, they amount to a widespread and systemic attack on the civilian population and, therefore, to crimes against humanity. While the Syrian regime is primarily responsible, non-state actors have also been committing these types of crimes. The article discusses the general processes that have been set up to deal with the conflict in international law and by the United Nations in places like Syria. It finds that very little has been done to end the conflict in Syria, other than mediation. The article then reviews the international processes dealing with disappearances and detentions in Syria that families can report to, and the role these institutions have played so far. It again finds that very little has been achieved. The article also examines other countries where processes have been set up to deal with missing and disappeared persons, such as Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Cyprus, and Georgia, to learn the lessons from these past processes for the Syrian situation. It is argued that, generally when mass atrocities occur, the UN on rare occasions will create an accountability process, but never creates a process that focuses on the needs of victims: finding their loved ones, getting them released from custody if they are alive, or finding the truth about what happened to them and where their remains are. The article therefore argues that a new mechanism is needed for Syria (but also for other places) to get people released, and to find information on others whose whereabouts are unknown due to the conflict and/or the mass human rights abuses. It contends that the mechanism could be set up by the UN, and if not, by a regional actor such as the European Union, or by several states. It is reasoned that the mechanism ought to have a Board made up of a representative each from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP), the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID), the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions (WGAD) and a Syrian organisation, elected each year.","PeriodicalId":13730,"journal":{"name":"International Human Rights Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41632114","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-29DOI: 10.1163/22131035-10020005
J. D. Mujuzi
Article 14(6) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (iccpr) provides for the right to compensation for wrongful conviction or miscarriage of justice. In Hong Kong, there are two compensation schemes for people who have been wrongfully convicted – the statutory scheme under Article 11(5) of the Bill of Rights Ordinance and the ex gratia scheme (also applicable to wrongful imprisonment). Although there are cases in which Hong Kong courts have dealt with the right to compensation under the ex gratia scheme, it was only in March 2020, in A v Secretary for Justice and Another, that the High Court, for the first time, dealt with a case on the right to compensation under Article 11(5). In this article, the author discusses the right to compensation for wrongful conviction in Hong Kong generally and in particular under Article 11(5) of the Bill of Rights Ordinance. The author deals with the case of A v Secretary for Justice and Another and illustrates how the High Court’s interpretation of Article 11(5) of the Bill of Rights Ordinance is likely to impact on the right to compensation for wrongful conviction in Hong Kong in the future.
{"title":"Compensation for Wrongful Conviction/Miscarriage of Justice in Hong Kong in Light of A v Secretary for Justice and Another [2020] hkcfi 427; hcal 176/2018 (11 March 2020)","authors":"J. D. Mujuzi","doi":"10.1163/22131035-10020005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-10020005","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Article 14(6) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (iccpr) provides for the right to compensation for wrongful conviction or miscarriage of justice. In Hong Kong, there are two compensation schemes for people who have been wrongfully convicted – the statutory scheme under Article 11(5) of the Bill of Rights Ordinance and the ex gratia scheme (also applicable to wrongful imprisonment). Although there are cases in which Hong Kong courts have dealt with the right to compensation under the ex gratia scheme, it was only in March 2020, in A v Secretary for Justice and Another, that the High Court, for the first time, dealt with a case on the right to compensation under Article 11(5). In this article, the author discusses the right to compensation for wrongful conviction in Hong Kong generally and in particular under Article 11(5) of the Bill of Rights Ordinance. The author deals with the case of A v Secretary for Justice and Another and illustrates how the High Court’s interpretation of Article 11(5) of the Bill of Rights Ordinance is likely to impact on the right to compensation for wrongful conviction in Hong Kong in the future.","PeriodicalId":13730,"journal":{"name":"International Human Rights Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41388355","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-10DOI: 10.1163/22131035-10020003
Article 16 of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families protects the right of migrant workers and members of their families to liberty and security of person. Under Article 17, those deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person and for their cultural identity. The Committee on Migrant Workers’ General Comment No. 5 (2021) provides authoritative interpretation of articles 16 and 17 and other articles of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families in the context of the rising trend towards criminalization of migration and increasingly frequent use of detention of migrants. General Comment No. 5 (2021) intends to provide guidance to States on fulfilling their obligations under the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families in relation to the right to liberty and protection against arbitrary detention, and other intersecting human rights obligations and other human rights obligations arising from the intersection of those rights with other human rights. The General Comment is also aimed at providing guidance to States on the implementation of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration and to other stakeholders on implementing initiatives to promote and protect human rights and to monitor compliance thereof.
{"title":"General comment No. 5 (2021) on Migrants’ Rights to Liberty, Freedom from Arbitrary Detention and their Connection with other Human Rights","authors":"","doi":"10.1163/22131035-10020003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-10020003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Article 16 of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families protects the right of migrant workers and members of their families to liberty and security of person. Under Article 17, those deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person and for their cultural identity. The Committee on Migrant Workers’ General Comment No. 5 (2021) provides authoritative interpretation of articles 16 and 17 and other articles of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families in the context of the rising trend towards criminalization of migration and increasingly frequent use of detention of migrants. General Comment No. 5 (2021) intends to provide guidance to States on fulfilling their obligations under the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families in relation to the right to liberty and protection against arbitrary detention, and other intersecting human rights obligations and other human rights obligations arising from the intersection of those rights with other human rights. The General Comment is also aimed at providing guidance to States on the implementation of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration and to other stakeholders on implementing initiatives to promote and protect human rights and to monitor compliance thereof.","PeriodicalId":13730,"journal":{"name":"International Human Rights Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49499013","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-10DOI: 10.1163/22131035-10020004
{"title":"Books Received","authors":"","doi":"10.1163/22131035-10020004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-10020004","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":13730,"journal":{"name":"International Human Rights Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46986007","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-09DOI: 10.1163/22131035-10020001
Thi Hong Nguyen, Phuong Dung Nguyen
Women migrant workers, who make up almost half of the migrant population in Vietnam, have been seeking employment opportunities in order to strengthen their standing both economically and socially. Nevertheless, women migrant workers are exposed to more risks and human rights violations than their male counterparts owing to their binary susceptibility as migrants and women. Compounding this, the existing international (human rights) treaties have yet to afford sufficient legal protection to them. Coming from a third world nation, Vietnamese female migrant workers face a multitude of risks arising from their status. Given the risks that they face, further actions by the Vietnamese Government to comprehensively address the problems related to the protection of migrant workers’ rights are needed. Cooperation amongst States in establishing a dialogue and reaching solutions to effectively tackle issues related to women migrant workers is essential.
{"title":"Ensuring the Rights of Women Migrant Workers – Analysis and Practice from Viet Nam","authors":"Thi Hong Nguyen, Phuong Dung Nguyen","doi":"10.1163/22131035-10020001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-10020001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Women migrant workers, who make up almost half of the migrant population in Vietnam, have been seeking employment opportunities in order to strengthen their standing both economically and socially. Nevertheless, women migrant workers are exposed to more risks and human rights violations than their male counterparts owing to their binary susceptibility as migrants and women. Compounding this, the existing international (human rights) treaties have yet to afford sufficient legal protection to them. Coming from a third world nation, Vietnamese female migrant workers face a multitude of risks arising from their status. Given the risks that they face, further actions by the Vietnamese Government to comprehensively address the problems related to the protection of migrant workers’ rights are needed. Cooperation amongst States in establishing a dialogue and reaching solutions to effectively tackle issues related to women migrant workers is essential.","PeriodicalId":13730,"journal":{"name":"International Human Rights Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43106948","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：