VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF FREEDOM TO LEAVE ANY COUNTRY

Liberty of movement is an indispensable condition for the free development of a person and this right interacts with several others in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. As stated in Article 12 of ICCR, this right includes the freedom to leave any country, including his own. The ICCR is the foremost treaty dealing with the civil and political rights. It expressly stipulates that everyone residing legally within a state has the right to choose his/her place of residence and has the right to move around freely. In addition all people also have the right to leave any country including their own and shall not be deprived of the right to enter back into their country. These stipulations shall not be restricted except when national security, public order, health, morals, or the rights of others are at stake. Any permissible limitations which may be imposed on the rights protected under article 12 must not nullify the principle of liberty of movement, and are governed by the requirement of necessity provided for in Article 12, Par 3, and by the need for consistency with the other rights recognized in the Covenant. Hence, Recho, in punishing a national of Armis, Ms. Shunzette, by dismissing her from work and canceling the contract of her residence, as a result of leaving the country due to her intention of protecting her family, clearly and grossly violated this principle of freedom of any human being to leave any country. Though the ICCR provides for exceptional circumstances in which rights under Art. 12, paragraphs 1 and 2 may be restricted. This provision authorizes the State to restrict these rights only to protect national security, public order, public health or morals and the rights and freedoms of others. To be permissible, restrictions must be provided by law, must be necessary in a democratic society for the protection of these purposes and must be consistent with all other rights recognized in the Covenant. Recho, in justifying their actions, was quick to claim that the cause of Ms. Shunzettes dismissal is simply due to the breach of her employment contract on leaving work without permission, but Recho failed to acknowledge the threat of the deadly epidemic to the nation, to Ms. Shunzette, and to her child; compelling her to leave the country immediately. Recho refusal to consider these circumstances shows their rejection to uphold all the human rights violated by their actions which are prejudicial and damaging to the attainment of self dignity of a human being. The General Comment 27 on Freedom of Movement provides an in depth look at the freedom of movement, its ramifications and even its restrictions. This "general comment" picks apart every section of Article 12 of the ICCR, further examining it from a legal standpoint. It lists restrictions that under exceptional circumstances that can potentially be placed on freedom of movement, and lastly, stipulates the right to enter one's own country. It specifically provides that in adopting laws providing for restrictions permitted

by Article 12, paragraph 3, States should always be guided by the principle that the restrictions must not impair the essence of the right; the relation between right and restriction, between norm and exception, must not be reversed. The laws authorizing the application of restrictions should use precise criteria and may not confer unfettered discretion on those charged with their execution. Furthermore, it also states that the said article clearly indicates that it is not sufficient that the restrictions serve the permissible purposes; they must also be necessary to protect them. Restrictive measures must conform to the principle of proportionality; they must be appropriate to achieve their protective function; they must be the least intrusive instrument amongst those which might achieve the desired result; and they must be proportionate to the interest to be protected. Recho may argue that conditions set forth by the employers and contract conformed by the employees should be faithfully complied with and Labor Laws provides for consequences should such employment contracts be breached; but such contract or Labor Laws may be perceived as restrictions under certain circumstances, and as it was already established that restrictions must not impair the essence of the right for it to be permissible and implemented. However, States have often failed to show that the application of their laws, expressly or impliedly, restricting the rights enshrined in Article 12, Par. 1 and 2, are in conformity with all requirements referred to in Article 12, Par 3. The application of restrictions in any individual case must be based on clear legal grounds and meet the test of necessity and the requirements of proportionality.1 Furthermore, with regards to International Labor Laws, the ILO Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council on Freedom of Movement for Workers within the Community, itself, provides for the full protection of workers within their respective communities or across national borders as with the case of migrant workers. The International Labour Organization (ILO) considers freedom of movement as a fundamental right of workers and their families and the right of freedom of movement requires that equality of treatment shall be ensured by law and common belief in respect of all matters relating to the actual pursuit of activities as employed persons and to eligibility for housing, and also that obstacles to the mobility of workers shall be eliminated, in particular as regards the worker's right to be joined by his family and the conditions for the integration of that family into the host country. This document goes on to list the rights of workers and their families establishing the basic guidelines by which governments and corporations must respect their workers and thus ensure them freedom of movement in order to pursue what is best for themselves and their families. International law supports order in the world and the attainment of humanity's fundamental goals of advancing peace, prosperity, human rights, and environmental protection.2 Numerous covenants and treaties are created in the light of these objectives and purposes. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the first international document that recognizes explicitly the right to freedom of movement of persons. This treaty stipulates
1 2

General Comment No. 27: Freedom of movement (Art.12) The Power and Purpose of International Law: Insights from the Theory and Practice of Enforcement Mary Ellen O'Connell

in Article 13 that everyone has the right to freely move around within the borders of their state and in addition everyone has the right to leave their country for any reason concerning them, but at the same time they have the right to return to that country if they so choose. Article 15.4 of the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, better know by its abbreviation CEDAW, states that women shall be afforded the same right as men to choose their nation of residence as well as their place of residence within that nation. Discrimination against women violates the basic rights of respect for human dignity as well as equality. The 1985 Declaration on the Human Rights of Individuals Who are not Nationals of the Country in which They Live establishes the basic rights of migrants, refugees and others who are not nationals of the country in which they reside. Article 5 stipulates that no restrictions can be placed on the freedom of movement of non-nationals. They cannot be forced to leave the country nor can they be prevented from moving around and choosing a residence within the borders of the country they are currently occupying. The 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, established in order to eliminate all forms of racial discrimination, aims to perform this task by setting down a list of guidelines as to how people should be treated, similarly to other human rights documents also states in its Article 5 that all people have the right to freedom of movement and residence within the border of the State, the right to leave any country, including one's own, and to return to one's country and the right to nationality. Human rights are "commonly understood as inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being." As such, the Preamble of the United Nations Charter, provides to wit: to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom, All people are entitled to the recognition of inherent dignity and certain inalienable rights, which are the "foundations of freedom and justice in the world." Freedom of movement is part of the "liberty of man" (Jagerskiold) thus making it one of the most basic human rights.3 Human rights violations occur when actions by state (or non-state) actors abuse, ignore, or deny basic human rights (including civil, political, cultural, social, and economic rights). Since the organization of the United Nations, numerous international treaties had been created to achive said purpose. International treaties are also called conventions,
3

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)

protocols, covenant, "acts", memorandum of understanding, statutes and so on.4 Amongst these are the ICCPR and the Vienna Convention of Treaties to which both Recho and Armis as signatories thereof and are bound by it and should uphold its purposes. Therefore, Rechos actions demonstrated that it failed to observe its obligations and duties under international law5, and its refusal to respect the fundamental human rights of Ms. Sunzette when it penalized her albeit the said justifiable circumstances gravely violated her freedom to leave any country and grossly violated all the applicable treaties which primary purpose is to respect, to protect, and to fulfill human rights.

4 5

International Treaties: Features and Importance, Prof. Dr. Yubaraj Sangroula http://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/Pages/WhatareHumanRights.aspx