Challenges for the contemporary international legal framework and the rule of law

Abstract

This paper explores the current level of legal protection of climate migrants in international and EU law and the repercussions that the present approach might have on the rule of law. It first analyses whether the current binding instruments of refugee and climate change law offer any protection for climate migrants and identifies a legal gap in this regard. It then briefly addresses the progress made by recently adopted soft law instruments and the UN Human Rights Committee decision in the Teitiota case, at the same time pointing out that the latter decision has set criteria which might jeopardise the realisation of the non-refoulement right which it aims to guarantee. The paper then analyses the literature on the link of climate change and migration, using the example of the Syrian civil war, the rise of anti-immigration populism which subsequently occurred, as well as the threat that such movements might pose for the rule of law. The authors conclude that the planned and systematic response of the international community to climate migration and continued good regional and bilateral practices are more likely to prevent sudden spikes in mass migration which could lead to anti-immigration populist movements.