Personal tools

Argument: Signing the Migrant Workers Convention is a liability and burden

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

"Finland and the UN Convention on Migrant Workers Rights: What would ratification mean?" On the Road to Success. May 8th, 2010: "Ratification would mean that Finland has willingly assumed the obligations laid down in the Convention and can be held liable under international law for failure to fulfill its obligations. Besides the obligation to respect the rights of migrant workers enshrined in the Convention, Finland would be obligated to submit reports to the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (CMW), as stipulated in Article 73 of the Convention. Finland would be expected to report on legislative, judicial, administrative and "other measures" taken to guarantee the rights of migrant workers and members of their families. The Committee would examine the reports and make recommendations to Finland - on what should be done to adequately protect migrant workers within its borders." [It should be noted that the author of this quote still advocates for Finland and other countries signing the Migrant Workers Convention, but simply acknowledges the above burdens and liabilities].

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits