International migration: security concerns and human rights standards.

Over the last two decades, the reinforcement of security-related migration policies has resulted in the perception of the foreigner, and especially the irregular migrant, as a category outside the circle of legality. The rights of foreigners in host countries have deteriorated due to the connection made between immigration and criminality. Restrictions imposed upon irregular migrants' basic political and civil rights have been accompanied by major obstacles to their access to economic and social rights, including the right to health. The events of 9/11 further contributed to this trend, which contradicts the basic premises of the human rights paradigm. Recent policy developments and ongoing international cooperation implementing systematic interception and interdiction mechanisms have led to the securitization of migration. The preventive and deterrent measures reinforce the security paradigm. By contrast, various national and international actors have been successful in defending irregular migrants' rights. At the domestic level, the involvement of the judiciary and civil society enhances the rights-based approach to foreigners. The role of judges is vital in holding policy-makers accountable for respecting the high national standards of human rights protection. This article elaborates on the dichotomy between the state's legitimate interest to ensure national security, and its domestic and international obligations to protect human rights for all, including irregular migrants. It focuses on the changing relationship between migration and security, on the one hand, and between state and individual, on the other hand. It affirms the necessity to recognize the pre-eminence of fundamental rights upon security concerns.