The legal consequences of the absence of a state of disembarkation in international law

Abstract

The movement of migrants across borders in the search of a better life is a ubiquitous notion which has substantially increased in the past decade as migrants flee war-torn countries. Migration through travel by sea has become a prevalent means of crossing borders. Irregular maritime migration has therefore led to an increase in rescue operations being conducted to ensure the safety of life at sea. However, the next step, which is the disembarkation of those rescued, has created a grey area in international law as the current law regime fails to stipulate an express and default State of disembarkation. In light of this lacuna, several States involved in the migration crisis have had a different response to the duty to disembark. This is due to the fact that such obligation strikes at the essence of a State’s sovereignty and would require the cessation of such sovereignty in order to allow disembarkation to have effect. The trend of protecting borders has resulted in pushbacks to countries deemed to be unsafe, in infringement of human rights. The unfortunate reality is that the victim of such discrepancy in State duties and obligations is the individual. Hence, in order to avoid the perish of more humans at sea, States must all pull the same weight and put solidarity at the forefront of the European response to issues related to disembarkation. It is only once solidarity is prevalent amongst all European States that the discussion related to relocation agreements can truly take place.