Contents page 1 And what you have from the migration Pact? Page 2 — “the key on page 3 is what the Federal government does” — “The States increasingly turn to non-Binding” On a page
read THE TIME: Professor Talmon, the UN-migration Pact are many rumors in circulation. Maybe you can help to create a bit of clarity. It is often claimed that the Pact to bring a human right to Migration. Is that right?
Stefan Talmon: This is wrong. From such a Pact is no individual right to Migration can be derived.
Professor Stefan Talmon
teaches constitutional and international law at the University of Bonn. As a lawyer, he has appeared, among others, the International court of justice in The Hague, and he advises governments on questions of international Law. Talmon observed for some time that international treaties are concluded little more, because governments shy away from clear commitments. Then it is for individual judges to concretize fuzzy agreements. This in turn leads to less acceptance of international agreements. The UN-Pact on Migration is only one example.
TIME: The next allegation is that the Pact set the Migration in motion, was perhaps even an exchange of populations in the States of the West – right or wrong?
Talmon: This is not a legal question but a political one. But I think an international Instrument like the Covenant triggers, as such, no movement of Refugees and does not target a population exchange.
TIME: Limits of the Pact, the sovereignty of the States?
Talmon: The Pact says explicitly that this is the case, and legally that is correct. But the law works on many different levels.
TIME: vertrack is the most point: The Pact is not explicitly legally binding, but is intended to act politically. You have to explain. Legally binding means, for example, that a citizen, a citizen has no enforceable claim under the Pact?
TIME: And it is said that the individual States are free to adopt laws that they think is right?
Talmon: Yes. There is also no international legal sanctions, if a state adheres to the appointments.
TIME: Politically intended, however, that something changes in the treatment of migrants in the world.
Talmon: that’s Right. All States enter into a political commitment, and to influence the behavior of States. And if the behavior of the States changes, can result, under certain circumstances, in the medium term also has a legal binding. Namely, if customary international law is formed.
This article dates back to the TIME no 51/2018. Here you can read the entire issue.
TIME: If all the States long enough to be able to is binding politically Binding at some point.
TIME: How fast does that go?
Talmon: The usually takes years or decades.
TIME: Who decides?
Talmon: in the end, the courts.
TIME: German food?
Talmon: German dishes, but not only.