Law
Most member states of the European Union ratified various international treaties and conventions that are supposed to protect human rights. However, reports by various human rights groups have posted disturbing figures about the number of asylum seekers and immigrants who cross the Mediterranean Sea to Europe but are not given asylum. Through the provisions of the UNCLOS-United Nation Convention on The Law of the sea, EU member states have an obligation to come to the rescue of a person who is distressed at sea, Follis (2015: 41). The action of various nations from the European Union have been criticised as the approach they have given to the influx of immigrants and asylum seekers, as some have argued, has contradicted the fundamental requirements of the international laws which they are signatories to. It is therefore appropriate to state that members sate of the EU are to be blamed for the death of asylum seekers and immigrants in the Mediterranean sea in the last 18 months.
The European Union has shifted the focus from the crisis of refugees to attempts to reduce smuggling. Through these, several refugees and immigrants have been sent back to their country of entry into the EU. However, the human rights watch has highlighted some of the responsibilities of the EU into four broad categories as follows, Ferrer and Houtum (2014: 297): (1) Members states of the European nation have a responsibility to save lives of those asylum seekers at sea so as to ensure safe arrival and protection of the asylum seekers. (2), Member states should allow vessels which are suspected to be ferrying smuggled goods and human trafficking. These vessels are supposed to be allowed to dock at safe territories within the EU so that investigations are launched on them. This is contrary to what many EU states have done in the past since they have always diverted such ships away from their territories. Member state are also to ensure that as they pursue vessels that are suspected of smuggling illegal goods and drag trafficking, the lives of passengers in such vessels should be protected, Rijpma (2010: 1) . However, the situation as it stands today, many of these obligations by EU member states are not executed, instead, individual states are seen to be having policies that have contravened the international agreements that are supposed to guarantee safety and state protection of refugees, immigrants and asylum seekers.
Most EU members have however countered these claims and in response, they have argued that they have a responsibility to ensure the safety of their citizens hence the measures they have put to check the influx of refugees are just but necessary. It is therefore evident that there is a loophole in the application or in the statement of the international laws. The EU union member states, for example, example require that asylum seekers and immigrants should provide identification upon arrival to the various EU states where they flee to seek asylum. This requirement is not illegal per se but considering the circumstances under which some of these refugees, especially from the horn of Africa, leave their homes, it would be wrong to deny such refugees asylum simply because they lack identification. In June, 2014 a judge of the CJEU (Court of Justice of the European Union) responded to this by saying that lack of identity papers did not justify extending immigration detention, Fargues & Bonfanti (2014: 23). Considering various international conventions and treaties that are geared towards refugee protection and safety, the acts of these EU seem o contravene the very fundamental laws of these conventions. For example states that boarder seas and oceans are required to develop appropriate rescue and search methods, and the sailors of such rescue ship should bear the responsibility passengers on board rescued at sea. Considering the provisions of Article 12 of the (ICCPR) (International Convention on Civil and Political Rights), “everyone is free to leave any country, including his own.” This statement means that an individual is guaranteed the rights to enjoy political freedom civil, and freedom from fear and persecution. However, more often than not, many states in the EU have completely acted contrary to this provision. It is therefore necessary to question the enforceability of such laws which are supposed to be held so high and observed by all countries who have ratified them
It is therefore right to say that the EU is responsible for the refugee issues that is experienced in the Mediterranean region today. There are various legal remedies that are available to the refusal by various EU member states to admit refugees and guarantee them safety, however, the spirit of the implementers of the law does not favour actions against those who contravene these convention and treaties, CALL(2014: 43).
. It is therefore necessary to investigate the loophole that exist in the application or even statement of these international laws and conventions before trying to apply them. It should be a priority of member states who ratify a treaty to align their local laws and policies to conform to the requirements of the international treaties to which they are party to. A is evidenced by the crisis of influx of asylum seekers and the abuse of their human rights, it is the laws that prevail in individual countries that have made such countries overlook international treaties and laws.
Though there are consequences that arise to those who contravene international laws, the enforcement of those consequences seem to be piped dream. Therefore going forward and to put to an end the issue of international treaties not achieving their purpose, strict implementation procedure and by legal authorities i.e., courts, should be put in place to ensure that the consequences that are supposed to befall those who contravene international treaties are applied justly and timely.
References
Ferrer-Gallardo, X. and van Houtum, H., 2014. The Deadly EU border control. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 13(2), pp.295-304.
Follis, K.S., 2015. Responsibility, emergency, blame: reporting on migrant deaths on the Mediterranean in the Council of Europe. Journal of Human Rights, 14(1), pp.41-62.
Rijpma, J.J., 2010. Frontex: successful blame shifting of the Member States?. Análisis del Real Instituto Elcano (ARI), (69), p.1.
Fargues, P. and Bonfanti, S., 2014. When the best option is a leaky boat: why migrants risk their lives crossing the Mediterranean and what Europe is doing about it.
Last, T. and Spijkerboer, T., 2014. Tracking Deaths in the Mediterranean. Fatal Journeys. Tracking Lives Lost During Migration, International Organization for Migration, Geneva, pp.85-106.
CALL, L., 2014. EU BORDER CONTROL: A MISSION TO SAVE LIVES AND PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS? A CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE. Flucht und Migration: Von Grenzen, Ängsten und Zukunftschancen, 65, p.43.
Stokholm, T., 2016. The Mediterranean Migrant Crisis.
