New research in the International Journal of Migration and Border Studies has looked at how comparative international law (CIL) can be used to better understand international migration law (IML). CIL is a research area that compares and analyses the laws and legal systems of different countries and regions. It can be used to show the similarities and reveal the differences in legal systems with a view to identifying best practices and emerging trends and how these might affect legal systems at the national level.
In the new work, Gillian Kane of the Irish Centre for Human Rights at the University of Galway, Ireland, has shown how CIL could enhance the analysis of international migration law by offering insights into the interaction between different migration regimes within states. The work also reveals the limitations of CIL, but suggests that CIL should become the focus of increased attention with implications for policymakers and stakeholders.
Migration is, of course, nothing new, but ever-increasing global mobility driven by a wide range of factors means there are new contexts for understanding migration and its governance. There is now a pressing need to understand the legal world with respect to migrant workers, refugees, and trafficked persons among others. “Given that migration, by its very nature, often transcends state borders, international law’s central role in migration governance is unsurprising,” Kane writes. She points out that the research perhaps raises more questions than it answers, such as “where to from here?” but might also point to how to answer such questions.
It could be time for scholars in this research area to reflect on how CIL, either alone or used in parallel with other approaches, could boost their research. “As IML scholars begin to explicitly adopt CIL frameworks, where appropriate, and engage in reflection about the insight and understanding which CIL can provide, the answer to the question of ‘where to from here?’ will emerge in practice,” Kane explains.
Kane, G. (2023) ‘Comparative international law: enhancing migration law enquiry?’, Int. J. Migration and Border Studies, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp.149–165.