Shortcomings and/or Missed Opportunities of the Global Compacts for the Protection of Forced Migrants

Abstract

The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) and the Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) are norm‐creating exercises, in the sense of being international legal documents for a new framework that reinforces existing structures and attempt to renew migration governance globally. They were expected to further develop the protection of all migrants. However, despite some progress, there are shortcomings and/or missed opportunities in what they were able to achieve, especially in the case of the protection of forced migrants. Understanding these shortcomings and/or missed opportunities as being conceptual and institutional in nature, and to assess both these sets, this article presents the idea of forced migration and the lack of international protection of forced migrants (part 1), describes the protection of forced migrants achieved by the Compacts (part 2), and ends by assessing the shortcomings and/or missed opportunities in both Compacts (part 3).

Narrating an ideal migration world? An analysis of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration

“…This leads to the third feature of the GCM, namely its normative aspiration to propose a programmatic vision and to identify what an ideal migration world should look like. Going beyond mere calls for cooperation, the GCM lays down the desirable political horizon towards which all actors should progress (Jubilut and Casagrande 2019). This is also in line with global governance, which implies hybrid spaces of discussion in which no single actor can impose its views and take decisions alone -hence the elaboration of shared visions that pull stakeholders together (Rosenau and Czempiel 1992).…”

Embracing uncertainty: rethinking migration policy through pastoralists’ experiences

“…While there has been increased emphasis on mixed migration flows, notably on asylum seekers and economic migrants travelling the same routes, it is only recently that there is an acknowledgement that the distinction between forced and voluntary migration is a matter of degree (cf. Jubilut 2019). Recent research has highlighted a range of strategies as central to migrant practices.…”

Düzensi̇z Göç Ve Mülteci̇ Hareketleri̇ni̇n Yöneti̇mi̇nde Neoli̇beral Hegemonya Arayişlari

“…Her ne kadar son tahlilde benzer yaklaşımların ürünü de olsalar, Küresel Göç Mutabakatı, hükümetlerarası müzakerelerle, BM sistemi içerisinde biçimlenmişken, Küresel Mülteci Mutabakatı BMMYK öncülüğünde sivil toplum kuruluşları, özel sektör temsilcileri, akademisyenler ve kalkınma uzmanlarının katkılarıyla hazırlanmıştır. Aynı Birleşmiş Milletler Zirvesi'nin birer sonucu olmalarına karşın söz konusu mutabakatlarda metinlerarası karşılıklı etkileşim veya herhangi bir diyalog bulunmaması eleştiri kaynağı olmuştur (Jubilut & Casagrande, 2019). Bu tercihin, uluslararası göç ve iltica konularını birbirinden ayrı tutma, göçmen ve 10 Yeni-Gramşiyan okulun Uluslararası İlişkiler disiplini içindeki yeri için bakınız (Yalvaç, 2010).…”