Do unlawfully residing migrants have a right to housing under the European Social Charter?

Transcription

1 Do unlawfully residing migrants have a right to housing under the European Social Charter? Pavlo Malyuta i June 2015 ELSA International Essay Competition on Social Rights ii

2 List of abbreviations The Committee The Charter ECtHR European Committee on Social Rights Revised European Social Charter European Court of Human Rights The UN Committee UN Committee of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights The Covenant ECHR UN United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights European Convention of Human Rights United Nations 2

3 Introduction Irregular migrants are viewed as one of the most vulnerable groups in the world today. 1 The question of their protection creates great tensions between notions of state sovereignty and the universality of human rights. Irregular migrants are usually denied entitlement to basic social rights in most countries. Recently, consensus has been emerging that they should be eligible for basic social guarantees in the country of presence. This question is especially pressing for Europe, which is a destination for hundreds of undocumented migrants every year. Since states are usually reluctant to progress in this sphere, international and regional mechanisms play a decisive role in the recognition of irregular migrants rights. European Social Charter is the most significant regional instrument in the sphere of social rights. European Committee of Social Rights, which is responsible for interpreting the Charter, has not remained aside the developments in the area of irregular migrants protection. 1. Right to housing in the Charter Revised European Social Charter is the only international instrument that contains provision specifically addressing housing rights, i.e. Article 31 deals exclusively with the right to housing. It reads as follows: With a view to ensuring the effective exercise of the right to housing, the Parties undertake to take measures designed: 1. to promote access to housing of an adequate standard; 2. to prevent and reduce homelessness with a view to its gradual elimination; 3. to make the price of housing accessible to those without adequate resources. In addition to this, housing obligations are also established in the context of other provisions of the Charter. Particularly, they can be found in Article 15 in relation to physically and mentally disabled persons, Article 16 as a part of the right of the family to social, legal and economic protection, Article 17 dealing with children and young persons, Article 13 granting a right to emergency shelter, Article 19 granting migrant workers the 1 There is a diverse terminology used in connection with unlawfully residing migrants: illegal, irregular, undocumented, unauthorized, etc. The essay will predominantly employ the term irregular migrants. 3

4 right to be treated equally in relation to access to housing, Article 23 setting the right of elderly persons to provision of housing suited to their needs and state of health. 2. Expansive interpretation of the Charter s personal scope The text of European Social Charter employs universalist language of fundamental rights. In its first part the Charter declares that everyone has the right to housing. However, the Appendix significantly narrows the set of entitlement and restricts the scope of the Charter, providing that the Articles 1 to 17 and 20 to 31 should be applied to foreigners only in so far as they are nationals of other Parties lawfully resident or working regularly within the territory of the Party concerned. Thus, from a textual standpoint, in order to enjoy rights under the Charter foreigner must satisfy three conditions: 1. be a national of one of the 38 parties to the Charter or the Revised Charter; 2. be lawfully resident, in other words be authorised to enter and reside in the state's territory; 3. and/or be working regularly, in other words be authorised to enter and work in the state's territory. 2 Nonetheless, the situation is not as straightforward as it might seem at the first glance. The Committee noted that the restriction of the Appendix applies to a wide range of social rights and has different impact on them. 3 In certain cases and under certain circumstances, the provisions of the Charter may be applied to migrants in an irregular situation. 4 Thus, the applicability of certain provisions to particular groups of individuals, in principle excluded by the Appendix, has to be examined on case by case basis, taking into account specific circumstances of the situation. 3. Principal case-law 5 Defence for Children International (DCI) v. the Netherlands, decision of 28 October 2009 The case concerned rights of children unlawfully residing in the Netherlands. The Committee concluded that children unlawfully present on the territory of a State Party do 2 European Committee of Social Rights, Digest of the Case Law of the European Committee of Social Rights (ECSR 2008) FIDH v France Comp no 14/2003 (ECSR, 8 September 2004) [30] 4 DCI v Belgium Comp no 69/2011 (ECSR, 23 October 2012) [35] 5 The content of cases is examined as far as it is relevant for the topic of the essay 4

5 not come within the personal scope of Article 31(1). 6 It was held that Article 31(2) applies to children, irrespective of their residence status and obliges states to provide adequate shelter to children unlawfully present in their territory for as long as they are in their jurisdiction. 7 The Committee stated that obligations related to the provision of shelter are the same under Article 31(2) and 17(1)( ). The Netherlands was found in violation of Articles 31(2) and 17(1)(c). DCI v. Belgium, decision of 23 October 2012 The complaint concerned illegally resident unaccompanied and accompanied foreign minors. The Committee held that the part of Article 16 relating to the right of families to decent housing and particularly the right not to be deprived of shelter applies to foreign families unlawfully present in the country. 8 Conference of European Churches (CEC) v. the Netherlands, decision of 1 July 2014 The subject of the case concerned the right of undocumented adult migrants to, inter alia, shelter. The Committee concluded that Article 13(4) applies to irregular migrants and obliges states to ensure emergency shelter for them. It was held that irregular migrants come with the scope of Article 31(2) and was acknowledged that In light of the Committee s established caselaw, shelter must be provided also to adult migrants in an irregular situation ( ). 9 The Netherlands was found in violation of Articles 13(4) and 31(2). European Federation of National Organisations working with the Homeless (FEANTSA) v. the Netherlands, decision of 2 July 2014 This case only partially concerned migrants in an irregular situation. The Committee reiterated that both Article 31(2) and 13(4) apply to irregular migrants. In the relevant case-law outlined above the Committee firstly examined the applicability of the Charter provisions relating to the right to housing to specific group of irregular migrants, namely, children, and later went on to unlawfully residing migrants as a 6 DCI v the Netherlands Comp no 47/2008 (ECSR, 20 October 2009) [45] 7 ibid [48], [64] 8 DCI v Belgium Comp no 69/2011 (ECSR, 23 October 2012) [136] 9 CEC v the Netherlands Comp no 90/2013 (ECSR, 1 July 2014) [144] 5

6 whole. In the very first case in 2009 the Committee made it clear that right to adequate housing under Article 31(1) does not apply to illegally present children. Since children as a group generally enjoy higher level of protection, inapplicability of Article 31(1) to them means that irregular migrants as a whole do not fall within the scope of this provision. It was, however, admitted that children enjoy right to shelter under Article 31(2). Thus, later cases concerned right to shelter, which forms a part of different provisions of the Charter, particularly Articles 31(2), 13(4), 16, 17(1)(c). In CEC v. the Netherlands and FEANTSA v. the Netherlands the Committee explicitly recognized that irregular migrants enjoy the right to shelter under the Charter. 4. Right to adequate housing (Article 31(1)) v. right to shelter (Article 31(2)) Under Article 31 states are obliged to promote access to housing of an adequate standard (para 1) and to prevent and reduce homelessness with a view to its gradual elimination (para 2). The reduction of homelessness in the second paragraph was interpreted to imply, among other measures, the provision of shelter. 10 In order to ensure the right to adequate housing under Article 31(1) states have to provide persons with living conditions of higher quality in comparison with the right to shelter under Article 31(2). Shelter is required to meet health, safety and hygiene standards and, in particular, be equipped with basic amenities ( ) in order to ensure that the dignity of the persons sheltered is respected. 11 Shelter is temporary in nature and does not have to meet the same requirements of privacy, family life and suitability as more permanent forms of standard housing. 12 Moreover, adequate housing, unlike shelter, includes a legal guarantee of security of tenancy. 13 Following such considerations, in DCI v the Netherlands the Committee explained that the rejection of adequate housing does not automatically mean that persons are denied basic care needed to avoid living in intolerable conditions. 14 In that judgement the Committee referred to the Recommendation of the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe on the implementation of the right to housing of June FEANTSA v France Comp no 39/2006 (ECSR, 5 December 2007) [101] 11 DCI v the Netherlands Comp no 47/2008 (ECSR, 20 October 2009) [62] 12 ibid 13 ibid [44] 14 ibid 6

7 where temporary shelter was considered as the minimum housing that corresponds with human dignity and the one from which all people should be able to benefit. Therefore, the Committee adopted minimalist approach to the interpretation of the right to housing of irregular migrants. They are only entitled to shelter with standards capable of ensuring human dignity. 5. Argumentation of the Committee In cases indicated above the Committee applied in principle the same approach to the interpretation of the Appendix and applicability of relevant provisions dealing with the right to shelter to irregular migrants. This section aims to identify and analyse its crucial points Teleological approach to the interpretation of the Charter The Committee interprets the Charter on the basis of Article 31(1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties which states, inter alia, that treaty should be interpreted in the light of its object and purpose. 15 The aim of the Charter is to implement at the European level ( ) the rights guaranteed to all human beings by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of The purpose of the Charter is to give life and meaning in Europe to the fundamental social rights of all human beings. 17 Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and his family, including ( ) housing. Article 2 stipulates that everyone is entitled to all the rights contained in the Declaration without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour or other status. It was explained that the Charter should be interpreted in a way that is the most appropriate to realize its aim, not that which would restrict to the greatest possible degree the obligations undertaken by the Parties. 18 It follows that in order to realize the aim of the Charter its Appendix inevitably has to be interpreted restrictively and undocumented migrants should be entitled to the protection, particularly in the area of housing. 15 FIDH v France Comp no 14/2003 (ECSR, 8 September 2004) [26] 16 DCI v Belgium Comp no 69/2011 (ECSR, 23 October 2012) [30] 17 ibid (emphasis added) 18 DCI v the Netherlands Comp no 47/2008 (ECSR, 20 October 2009) [36] 7

8 The Committee also stated that the Charter was envisaged as a complementary instrument to the European Convention on Human Rights and that the rights guaranteed in the Charter are not ends in themselves but they should complete the rights envisaged in ECHR. 19 Thus, it is important to examine how the question of irregular migrants and their housing rights is addressed in the Convention European Convention on Human Rights Unlike the Charter, ECHR does not restrict personal scope of its provisions. According to Article 1 of ECHR parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in the Convention. Thus, persons do not have to be lawfully present on the territory of a state to be entitled to the protection of ECHR. Individuals enjoy rights under the Convention as long as they are physically present within the jurisdiction of a state, irrespective of their status. Matti Mikkola, former chairman of the Committee, argues that the Charter, as an instrument supplementing ECHR, may not limit the scope of persons envisaged in the Convention. 20 He supports the statement that due to interdependent system of these legal documents, it is difficult to restrict by the Appendix in the Charter the universal applicability of the Charter s provisions, which are connected to the protection of human dignity under Articles 2, 3, 4(2), 5 and 8 of the Convention. 21 The Committee emphasises the importance of the ECtHR case law for its practice, noting that it is particularly concerned that its interpretation of Article 31 is fully in line with the European Court of Human Rights interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Convention. 22 Although rights envisaged in the Convention are essentially civil and political in nature, many of them have social and economic implications. 23 In its jurisprudence the ECtHR is developing minimum states obligations in the area of housing. Among the set of rights provided in ECHR, two articles are central for the protection of irregular migrants and their right to housing: Article 3, which prohibits 19 FIDH v France Comp no 14/2003 (ECSR, 8 September 2004) [27] 20 M Mikkola, Social Human Rights of Migrants under the European Social Charter < assessed 15 May ibid 22 FEANTSA v France Comp no 39/2006 (ECSR, 5 December 2007) [63] 23 Airey v Ireland App no 6289/73 (ECtHR, 9 September 1979) [26] 8

9 torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and Article 8, protecting the right to family and private life. In CEC v. the Netherlands and FEANTSA v. the Netherlands the Committee cited Article 3 of the Convention as a relevant international material. A particular attention has been paid to M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece judgement of the ECtHR. In that case the ECtHR took into account the lack of accommodation and the failure to ensure applicant s essential needs. Such living conditions played a decisive role in the conclusion that the complainant has been the victim of humiliating treatment in violation of Article 3 of the Convention. 24 The Committee also referred to N. v. the United Kingdom case in which the ECtHR pointed out that expulsion of an irregular migrant can constitute an inhuman treatment in exceptional circumstances, where, inter alia, no basic level of food, shelter or social support would be available to the complainant in the receiving State. 25 Thus, the ECtHR impliedly admitted that such basic assistance should be attainable in an expelling state. However, Article 3 of the Convention does not provide irregular migrants with an opportunity to remain in the state in order to continue to benefit from social or other forms of support. 26 In regard to Article 8, in Yordanova and others v. Bulgaria the ECtHR ruled that an obligation to secure shelter to particularly vulnerable individuals may flow from Article 8 of the Convention in exceptional cases. 27 In Chapman v. the United Kingdom it was acknowledged that Article 8 does not in terms recognise a right to be provided with a home. 28 Article 8 only creates a right to respect for a person s home and limits the extent to which public authorities can interfere with that right. 29 Therefore, the prohibition of inhuman treatment under Article 3, ECHR and the right to respect for private life under Article 8, ECHR have been interpreted by the ECtHR to imply positive minimum guarantees in the field of housing, in particular an obligation to provide shelter to vulnerable individuals, however, in exceptional circumstances. Since rights envisaged in the Charter complete those guaranteed by the Convention, the Charter, 24 M.S.S. v Belgium and Greece App no 30696/09 (ECtHR, 21 January 2011) [263] 25 CEC v the Netherlands Comp no 90/2013 (ECSR, 1 July 2014) [28] 26 N. v the United Kingdom App no 26565/05 (ECtHR, 27 May 2008) [42] 27 Yordanova and others v Bulgaria App no 25446/06 (ECtHR, 24 April 2012) [130] 28 Chapman v the United Kingdom App no 27238/95 (ECtHR, 21 January 2001) [99] 29 Cormac Ó Dúlacháin, Housing Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights and National Mechanisms (IHRC and Law Society Annual Conference: Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Making States Accountable, Dublin, November 2009) < assessed 16 May

10 dignity. 35 Therefore, unlawfully residing migrants should enjoy the right to shelter and be protected as an instrument designed specifically to protect social rights, should definitely grant irregular migrants at least the right to shelter Human dignity as a fundamental value The Committee considers that Human dignity is the fundamental value and indeed the core of positive European human rights law whether under the European Social Charter or under the European Convention of Human Rights. 30 It was also explained that states may treat differently persons present lawfully and those residing illegally in their territories. 31 However, in any case it is crucial that human dignity is respected. Differential treatment is prohibited only if it would place irregular migrants in an unacceptable situation in comparison with migrants in a regular situation. 32 Thus, the Committee has defined a clear minimum benchmark of protection that should be afforded to everyone, including irregular migrants, preservation of human dignity being determinative: When human dignity is at stake, the restriction of the personal scope should not be read in such a way as to deprive migrants in an irregular situation of the protection of their most basic rights enshrined in the Charter, nor to impair their fundamental rights, such as the right to life or to physical integrity or human dignity. 33 In its relevant case-law the Committee consistently stated that the right to shelter is closely connected to the right to life and is crucial for the respect of every person s human dignity. 34 Moreover, evictions from shelter of irregular migrants are banned because it would place them in the situation of extreme helplessness, which is detrimental for their human from eviction, since it is indispensable for the preservation of their human dignity Interpretation in the light of current conditions 30 FIDH v France, Comp no 14/2003 (ECSR, 8 September 2004) [31] 31 DCI v Belgium Comp no 69/2011 (ECSR, 23 October 2012) [35] 32 ibid 33 CEC v the Netherlands Comp no 90/2013 (ECSR, 1 July 2014) [28] 34 ibid [137] 35 FEANTSA v France Comp no 39/2006 (ECSR, 5 December 2007) [60] 10

11 In DCI v Netherlands the Committee reiterated that rights in the Charter must take a practical and effective, rather than a theoretical form and, therefore, shall be interpreted in the light of current conditions. In its letter of 13 July 2011 addressed to all States Parties the Committee draws the attention to the important social changes which have happened since the adoption of the Charter, in particular, the increase in migration flows over the last twenty years. Consequently, it was stressed that situation where only nationals of the States Parties can obtain respect for their social rights is a substantial discrimination and makes the Charter at odds with the universal nature of human rights Interpretation in the light of international instruments In its case-law the Committee establishes a clear link between the scope of the right to housing under the Charter and other instruments of international human rights law. The Committee interprets the Charter in the light of the principles enshrined in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, in particular Article 31(3)( ), which states that in the interpretation of the treaty account shall be taken to any relevant rules of international law applicable in the relations between the parties. 37 International human rights provisions are generally applicable to every person as a consequence of being human, regardless of migration status. 38 Thus, in principle, human rights norms contained in conventions do not apply to irregular migrants only if they are expressly excluded from the personal scope of an article. 39 The Committee refers to the United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as a key source of interpretation and attaches great importance to General Comments 4 and 7 of the UN Committee of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. 40 Article 11 of the Covenant recognizes the right to housing as a part of the right to an adequate standard of living. General Comment 4 interprets that the right to adequate housing 36 European Committee of Social Rights, Conclusions 2011 Volume 1 (Council of Europe Publishing, 2011) DCI v Belgium Comp no 69/2011 (ECSR, 23 October 2012) [35] 38 Massimo Merlino and Joanna Parkin, Fundamental and Human Rights Framework: Protecting Irregular Migrants in the EU (Centre for European Policy Study 2012) < otecting%20irregular%20migrants%20in%20the%20eu.pdf> assessed 18 May ibid 40 FEANTSA v France Comp no 39/2006 (ECSR, 5 December 2007) [64] [65] 11

12 applies to everyone and does not depend on the status of the individual. 41 The UN Committee considers the inherent dignity of the human person to require that housing is provided to all persons and that the right to live somewhere in security, peace and dignity should be ensured for everyone. 42 The UN Committee also maintains that the right to housing should not be interpreted narrowly in terms of shelter and establishes factors which have to be taken into account in assessing whether particular form of shelter constitutes adequate housing. 43 Therefore, the Covenant envisages the higher degree of protection for irregular migrants than the Charter, since under its provisions right to adequate housing should be applied to everyone. At the same time, Article 31(1) of the Charter, which deals with adequate housing, does not apply to migrants in an irregular situation. However, it is important to note that the language of the UN Committee is much stronger towards the right to shelter than the right to adequate housing. In General Comment 14 the right to basic shelter is viewed as a non-derogable core obligation of the states under the Covenant. 44 This means that it must be ensured even in exceptional circumstances. The majority of thematic international human right treaties also apply universal approach in relation to housing. In particular, Article 5 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination provides that states undertake to guarantee the right of everyone to equality before the law in the enjoyment of, inter alia, the right to housing. General Recommendation 30 on Discrimination against non-citizens notes that guarantees against racial discrimination apply to non-citizens regardless of their immigration status UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 4: The Right to Adequate Housing in Note by the Secretariat, Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies (13 December 1991) UN Doc HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 [6] 42 FEANTSA v the Netherlands Comp no 86/2012 (ECSR, 2 July 2014) [31] 43 UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 4: The Right to Adequate Housing in Note by the Secretariat, Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies (13 December 1991) UN Doc HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 [8] 44 UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 14: The Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health in Note by the Secretariat, Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies (11 August 2000) UN Doc HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 [43] 45 UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, General Recommendation 30 (01 October 2004) UN Doc CERD/C/64/Misc.11/rev.3 [7] 12

13 effect. 48 Therefore, most the UN instruments declare the right to adequate housing for everyone. Article 27 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child provides, State Parties recognize the right of every child to a standard of living adequate for the child s ( ) development. This was interpreted to imply an obligation to provide assistance with regard to housing. 46 Article 28 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities provides that parties recognize the right of persons with disabilities to an adequate standard of living for themselves and their families, including adequate ( ) housing. According to Article 2 the purpose of this instrument is to ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities. Nonetheless, Article 43(1)(d) of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families grants right to enjoy equality of treatment with nationals of the State of employment in relation to access to housing only to documented migrants. The Committee has also noted that it paid close attention to and greatly benefited from the work of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on adequate housing. 47 The Report of the Special Rapporteur indicates that Regardless of their immigration status, all migrants must be afforded essential levels of protection with regard to their access to adequate housing and living conditions. It also mentions ensuring access to basic shelter and housing to all migrants in their territory as a part of States core obligations, which have to be guaranteed with immediate At the same time, the requirement to provide shelter for all migrants is viewed as an obligation of higher status, which states cannot derogate from. Conclusion Unlawfully residing migrants have the right to housing under the Charter that is, however, narrower in scope than the right enjoyed by legally residing persons. Despite the fact the Appendix to the Charter limits personal scope of its provisions to persons lawfully residing in the territory of states, the Committee applied expansive interpretation. It was 46 UN Committee on the Rights of a Child, General Comment 6: Treatment of unaccompanied and separated children outside their country of origin (1 September 2005) UN Doc CRC/GC/2005/6 [44] 47 FEANTSA v France Comp no 39/2006 (ECSR, 5 December 2007) [65] 48 UNHRC Report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing (2010) UN Doc A/65/261 [81] 13

14 stated that when specific right is crucial for the preservation of human dignity, irregular migrants should not be denied it. The right to adequate housing under Article 31(1) was not considered to be of such importance, but the right to shelter was, since shelter is viewed as a minimum housing corresponding with human dignity. In CEC v. the Netherlands and FEANTSA v. the Netherlands the Committee explicitly recognized that irregular migrants enjoy right to shelter under the Charter, which is a part of, inter alia, Article 31(2) of the Charter. Such approach is in line with the ECtRH s interpretation of ECRH, which the Charter aims to complement, as well as international principles where the provision of shelter to every person in need is defined as a non-derogable obligation of states. Bibliography Case Law of the European Committee of Social Rights CEC v the Netherlands Comp no 90/2013 (ECSR, 1 July 2014) DCI v Belgium Comp no 69/2011 (ECSR, 23 October 2012) DCI v the Netherlands Comp no 47/2008 (ECSR, 20 October 2009) FEANTSA v France Comp no 39/2006 (ECSR, 5 December 2007) FEANTSA v the Netherlands Comp no 86/2012 (ECSR, 2 July 2014) FIDH v France Comp no 14/2003 (ECSR, 8 September 2004) Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights Airey v Ireland App no 6289/73 (ECtHR, 9 September 1979) Chapman v the United Kingdom App no 27238/95 (ECtHR, 21 January 2001) M.S.S. v Belgium and Greece App no 30696/09 (ECtHR, 21 January 2011) N. v the United Kingdom App no 26565/05 (ECtHR, 27 May 2008) Yordanova and others v Bulgaria App no 25446/06 (ECtHR, 24 April 2012) 14

15 Treaties Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights, as amended) (ECHR) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (adopted 13 December 2006, entered into force 30 March 2007) UN Doc A/RES/61/106, Annex I Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted 20 November 1989, entered into force 2 September 1990) 1577 UNTS 3 (CRC) European Social Charter (Revised) (3 May 1996) ETS 163 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (adopted 21 December 1965, entered into force 4 January 1969) 660 UNTS 195 (ICERD) International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (adopted 18 December 1990, entered into force 1 July 2003) UN Doc A/RES/45/158 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 3 January 1976) 993 UNTS 164 (ICESCR) Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted 10 December 1948 UNGA Res 217 A(III) (UDHR) Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (adopted 23 May 1969, entered into force 27 January 1980) 1155 UNTS 331 (VCLT) Interpretative documents UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 14: The Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health in Note by the Secretariat, Compilation of General Comments and General Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies (11 August 2000) UN Doc HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 4: The Right to Adequate Housing in Note by the Secretariat, Compilation of General Comments and General 15

16 Recommendations Adopted by Human Rights Treaty Bodies (13 December 1991) UN Doc HRI/GEN/1/Rev.6 UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, General Recommendation 30 (01 October 2004) UN Doc CERD/C/64/Misc.11/rev.3 UN Committee on the Rights of a Child, General Comment 6: Treatment of unaccompanied and separated children outside their country of origin (1 September 2005) UN Doc CRC/GC/2005/6 UNHRC Report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing (2010) UN Doc A/65/261 Other material Dúlacháin C, Housing Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights and National Mechanisms (IHRC and Law Society Annual Conference: Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Making States Accountable, Dublin, November 2009) < assessed 16 May 2015 European Committee of Social Rights, Digest of the Case Law of the European Committee of Social Rights (ECSR 2008) European Committee of Social Rights, Conclusions 2011 Volume 1 (Council of Europe Publishing, 2011) Merlino M, Parkin J, Fundamental and Human Rights Framework: Protecting Irregular Migrants in the EU (Centre for European Policy Study 2012) < Framework_%20Protecting%20Irregular%20Migrants%20in%20the%20EU.pdf> assessed 18 May 2015 Mikkola M, Social Human Rights of Migrants under the European Social Charter < assessed 15 May

17 i The responsibility for the information and views set out in the reports lies entirely with the author. ii The Panel of Experts that assessed the submissions to the competition were the following: Annalisa Ciampi (University of Verona), Francesco Costamagna (University oá Turin), Donata Gottardi (University of Verona) Giovanni Guiglia (University of Verona), Lorenza Mola (University of Turin), Claudio Panzera (Mediterranea University of Reggio Calabria), Neliana Rodean (University of Verona), Evelyne Schmid (University of Bern), Gregor T. Chatton (Swiss Federal Supreme Court), Jaume Saura Estapa (University of Barcelona), Mercedes Fernández (Universidad Pontificia Comillas), Joaquín Eguren (Universidad Pontificia Comillas), Cristina Cortázar (Universidad Pontificia Comillas), José Luis Rey (Universidad Pontificia Comillas), Anders Narvestad (University of Oslo), Azin Tadjdini (University of Oslo), Johan Leiss (University of Oslo), Marit Frogner (Labour Court of Norway), Benedita Mac Crorie (University of Minho) and Tiago Fidalgo De Freitas (University of Lisbon). 17