Committee on the Rights of Migrant Workers Opens Forty-First Session, Adopts Joint General Comments and Recommendations on Eradicating Xenophobia Towards Migrants and Others Perceived as Such
The Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families this morning opened its forty-first session, hearing an address by a representative of the United Nations Secretary-General, followed by a discussion with representatives of civil society from Indonesia, Mauritania, Albania, Uganda and Colombia. The report of Honduras will be reviewed during the session but no civil society speakers from that country took the floor.
Following its opening meeting, the Committee held a short plenary to adopt its joint general comments seven and eight and the joint general recommendations thirty-eight and thirty-nine of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination on eradicating xenophobia towards migrants and others perceived as such. Several Experts from both Committees took the floor to express thanks to all those who had contributed to developing the general comments and recommendations.
Pablo Ceriani Cernadas, Vice-Chair of the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families and co-leader of the Task Force on the development of the general comments and recommendations, said the aim of the recommendations was to overturn the alarming trend being seen around the world in which the basic principles of international law were not being enforced and the rights of migrants were being violated in a vicious cycle.
Ibrahima Guisse, Member of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and co-leader of the Task Force on the development of the general comments and recommendations, said the world was seeing a rise in xenophobia and discrimination and both Committees hoped that this work would contribute to mitigating this scourge.
During the opening meeting, the Committee adopted the agenda and programme of work for the session, during which it is scheduled to review the reports of Mauritania, Indonesia and Honduras regarding their implementation of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.
Opening the session, Antti Korkeakivi, Chief of the Human Rights Treaty Branch of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and representative of the Secretary-General, said during the session, the Committee would review the second periodic reports of Honduras, Indonesia and Mauritania; adopt a list of issues for Colombia’s fourth periodic report; and prepare lists of issues prior to reporting for Albania’s third periodic report and Uganda’s second periodic report under the Convention.
Mr. Korkeakivi acknowledged the serious challenges facing the human rights treaty body system due to the liquidity crisis. Reduced resources had already cut treaty body meeting time by more than 30 per cent and caused major delays, including the postponement of 39 State reviews. The Office would continue advocating for adequate resources and consistently emphasised the impact of these constraints on human rights protection.
Speakers on Indonesia raised issues, including the inadequate implementation of the migrant worker protection law, the lack of protection for victims of human trafficking, and the ill-treatment of migrant workers on vessels.
On Mauritania, speakers addressed the need for further information on irregular migration, violations at the border with Mali, and the necessity for increased training on the Convention.
Regarding Albania, Mauritania and Uganda, one speaker said externalisation schemes were a concern for all three countries, as well as the detention of vulnerable persons and third country deportation procedures.
On Colombia, a speaker noted concerns on deportations from the United States, reverse migration flows, and the situation of Venezuelan migrants.
The following civil society organizations spoke on Indonesia: the Indonesian National Human Rights Commission; the Indonesian National Commission on Violence against Women; the Human Rights Working Group Indonesia; and the Indonesian Civil Society Coalition
The following non-governmental organizations spoke on Mauritania: the National Human Rights Commission of Mauritania; the National Mechanism for the Prevention of Torture of Mauritania; the President of the "Peace" Association for the Fight against Coercion and Injustice; and the Abolitionist Resistance Initiative.
The Global Detention Project spoke on Albania, Mauritania and Uganda.
The Defensoria del Pueblo spoke on Colombia.
The webcast of Committee meetings can be found here. All meeting summaries can be found here. Documents and reports related to the Committee’s forty-first session can be found here.
The Committee will next meet at 3 p.m. this afternoon, Monday, 1 December to begin its consideration of the second periodic report of Mauritania (CMW/C/MRT/2).
Opening Statement
ANTTI KORKEAKIVI, Chief of the Human Rights Treaty Branch of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said during the session, the Committee would review the second periodic reports of Honduras, Indonesia and Mauritania; adopt a list of issues for Colombia’s fourth periodic report; and prepare lists of issues prior to reporting for Albania’s third periodic report and Uganda’s second periodic report under the Convention.
Together with the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the Committee would launch the general recommendations and general comments on guidelines for eradicating xenophobia toward migrants and those perceived as such. The joint general recommendations and comments demonstrated how xenophobia operated across societies and institutions, disproportionately affecting migrants. By combining legal interpretation, policy guidance and human rights standards, the two committees offered States practical tools to dismantle discrimination, foster inclusion, and advance the Sustainable Development Goals.
The Convention remained a Convention of the future. Reaching 60 ratifications in 2025 was an important milestone, yet significant work remained. States were encouraged to ratify the Convention, and it was welcome that the Committee continued promoting ratification in cooperation with States, the Inter-Parliamentary Union and civil society. Finally, Mr. Korkeakivi acknowledged the serious challenges facing the human rights treaty body system due to the liquidity crisis. Reduced resources had already cut treaty body meeting time by more than 30 per cent and caused major delays, including the postponement of 39 State reviews. The Office would continue advocating for adequate resources and consistently emphasise the impact of these constraints on human rights protection.
Statements by National Human Rights Institutions and Non-Governmental Organizations
Indonesia
In the discussion on Indonesia, speakers among other things said Indonesia remained one of the largest origin countries of migrant workers with more than 9 million Indonesian nationals working abroad. While remittances continued to contribute significantly to the national economy, the protection of migrant workers remained inconsistent, fragmented, and insufficiently rights based. One speaker acknowledged that the Government had established a dedicated ministry for the protection of Indonesian migrant workers, and others noted progress made by the Government, such as the enactment of the sexual violence law, and the strengthening of policies and measures taken to save migrant workers from the death penalty, which were meaningful steps. However, concerns remained
The implementation of the 2017 migrant worker protection law was inadequate. Several essential regulations had not yet been issued, and oversight of private recruitment agencies remained inadequate. The national action plan on the Global Compact for Migration remained unadopted, delaying coherent progress toward safe, orderly, and rights-based migration governance. This had a disproportionate impact on women migrant workers. The speakers remained deeply concerned about the absence of actions from the Indonesia Government to ratify International Labour Organization Conventions No. 189 and 181 concerning domestic workers, although this had been recommended previously by the Committee back in 2017.
Thirty countries currently had destination migrant worker agreements in place with Indonesia, however, many migrant workers who were victims of trafficking in person did not receive adequate access to justice or restitution. Law enforcement against trafficking in persons had not been carried out effectively, due to difficulty in determining if an act constituted trafficking in persons. Anti-trafficking activists were criminalised and civil society organizations had no voice in the anti-trafficking task force structure. Thousands of young Indonesians fell victim to human trafficking through the misuse of digital technology and were trapped in forced crime, forced to work in online scam centres in the South-East Asia area.
From 2018 to 2024, 1,368 cases involving physical, sexual, psychological and economic violence had been documented against migrant women workers. In 2024, there had been 23 cases of violence against migrant workers, perpetrated by both employees and migrant worker recruitment companies. Ill-treatment of crew members on foreign vessels remained a prominent issue. Indonesian migrant fishers continued to experience severe exploitation; 80 per cent of these persons worked more than 16 hours per day, and many faced forced labour conditions onboard distant-water fleets. Indonesia had not guaranteed real protection for migrant fishers.
The Committee was urged to strengthen and fully implement the migrant worker protection law and all bilateral agreements with participatory monitoring, cross-border social security, and survivor-centred protection across relevant ministries, agencies and Indonesian missions, and to ratify International Labour Organization Conventions No. 188, 181, and 189 to close remaining legal protection gaps for all Indonesian migrant workers. The Committee should also call on Indonesia to establish and enforce an ethical recruitment grounded in the employer-pays principle, ensuring that no recruitment costs were imposed on workers at any stage of the migration process. It was also important to promote decent work for migrant workers by ensuring universal access to social protection, occupational safety and health.
Mauritania
In the discussion on Mauritania, speakers, among other things, said Mauritania was a country of transit and arrival. Some major achievements by the State included the adoption of law no. 2020-017 on the prevention and suppression of trafficking in persons and the protection of victims; the adoption of the decree on the protection of victims, witnesses of trafficking in persons and their families, investigators and undercover agents; the establishment of the National Authority for the Fight against Trafficking in Persons and Smuggling of Migrants; and the adoption and implementation of a referral mechanism for victims of trafficking in persons. The State had signed several migration agreements, including with the European Union, to combat irregular migration. Two agreements had also been signed with Senegal to combat illegal migration. The Mauritanian Government had taken significant steps to protect and promote the rights of migrant workers, in line with international and regional commitments.
Additionally, a new welcoming centre for migrants in an irregular situation had been established, which met all necessary measures to address their protection. There was a complaints mechanism in place, which received complaints directly from migrants through multi-disciplinary teams, and had a mandate to act on these complaints. Awareness raising campaigns and visits to migrant welcoming centres had been improved and were regularly carried out by the national human rights institution to guarantee that the human rights of migrants were being respected. In 2022, Mauritania had a regularisation campaign and a census of migrants to understand the needs of migrant children.
One speaker said serious cases of violations had been documented, particularly at the border with Mali, where migrants had been abandoned in dangerous areas, requiring social, health and technological assistance. There needed to be a clear-cut, transparent human policy for protecting migrants, based on human rights.
Speakers called on the international community and technical partners to provide increased technical support to the Government of Mauritania. The State was also urged to launch more information campaigns on migrants' rights and the risks of irregular migration, and to promote the social integration and inclusion of migrants and refugees by providing greater freedom of movement. It was also vital that Mauritania strengthen the fight against trafficking in persons and protect vulnerable migrants, including women and children; develop education and training programmes on the Convention and ensure that such training was provided to all public officials, including the judiciary and security forces; and adopt educational programmes aimed at ensuring that migrant workers were aware of their rights.
Albania, Mauritania and Uganda
The speaker said, among other things, that these three countries had externalisation schemes which had seen wealthy countries sending migrants back under specialised agreements. Despite the call of the Special Rapporteur on migrants to end these countries cooperation with externalisation schemes, this had not been the case.
On Albania, testimonies at the border stated that people requesting asylum had been abused and pushed back. The Committee was called on to urge the State party to monitor the condition of immigration centres and implement legislation to ensure vulnerable groups like children were protected from detention.
Mauritania had adopted swift operations which had transformed neighbouring workplaces and homes into places of fear for migrants, including those from Mali, Senegal and Niger. The Committee were urged to pressure Mauritania to ensure all removal decisions were based on individual assessments, prohibit detention of vulnerable persons, and amend the 2024 immigration law to remove the criminalisation penalty for irregular stay.
On Uganda, the speaker noted there was deep concern about Uganda’s increasing role in third country deportation agreements to receive deportees from the United States. Uganda had received deportees from Israel who were arrested and beaten on arrival. The Committee was urged to pressure Uganda to ensure immigration detention was used as a last resort and never for families, to publish a full list of all detention centres, to establish an independent oversight mechanism to guarantee access to medical and legal aid for all migrants, and to ensure robust safeguards for all individuals received under the third transfer agreement.
Colombia
The speaker on Colombia, among other things, said Colombia was facing a migratory scenario marked by significant changes. The combination of more restrictive policies in destination countries, greater controls in transit countries, and increased risks in border areas had transformed regional migration dynamics. Rising United States deportations, amounting to over 5,000 Colombians in 2025, had contributed to a new trend of reverse migratory flows, with migrants returning from Central America to South America. This shift had created new humanitarian challenges and required coordinated responses to ensure rights and protection. The Colombian Ombudsman’s Office had recommended measures to support family reunification and improve social and economic inclusion for deported migrants.
Colombia’s geographic position had made it a country of transit, destination and return, and migration flows through the Darién–Chocó corridor had reached around 400,000 people until 2024. In 2025, northward movement declined sharply due to stricter United States policies, tighter controls in Panama, and difficulty continuing the journey. By August, over 16,000 migrants had returned south through Colombia. Between January and October 2025, more than 18,600 people entered Colombia through reverse flows, including many families, pregnant women, single mothers, children, and older people. These migrants had limited resources, leaving them vulnerable to trafficking, smuggling, violence, discrimination and other abuses.
Two main return routes were identified, including the Caribbean route and the North Pacific route which had weak institutional presence, low coordination with Panama, and limited information and support for migrants. Serious human rights violations were documented along these routes, including trafficking, sexual exploitation, child labour, theft, gender-based violence, and risks linked to armed conflict. Colombia also continued to host the largest number of Venezuelan migrants, over 2.8 million, with this group facing multiple challenges that hindered their integration. However, Colombia had made progress in terms of labour inclusion for migrants, including through law 2466 of 2025, which enabled the regularisation of migrant workers through the signing of a labour contract.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert said the concept of externalisation raised was important and needed to be paid due consideration by the Committee.
Another Committee Expert asked how many reception centres were in Mauritania, how many visits had been conducted, and what recommendations could be made to the Government? How many people were held in these centres?
Another Expert asked if Mauritania’s human rights institution still retained A status? What recommendations had been made to the Mauritanian Government following visits to the migrant centres?
An Expert asked if Indonesia had implemented the Committee’s recommendations regarding imprisonment for irregular entry into the country. Could more information on Mauritania’s Memorandum of Understanding be explained, including the level of cooperation? For Colombia, what was the response of the Colombian State to protect those being deported from the United States? What obstacles were irregular Venezuelans encountering in becoming regular? What were the obstacles in access to health?
A Committee Expert asked for more information on digital exploitation in Indonesia? Were Indonesian migrants abroad registered? Could children born abroad be registered? Was the administration making effort to reduce irregularities caused by private hiring companies? Regarding Colombia’s reverse flow, was there still regular migration and did these two flows clash?
Another Expert asked for further clarification on two of Mauritania’s human rights institutions? Could information on the tragedies on Mauritania’s coastline in 2025 be provided? When trying to carry out sea rescue operations, what were the limits encountered in regional cooperation?
Another Committee Expert asked which countries’ nationals were primarily coming to Indonesia as a country of destination and as a country of transit? Was there any national action plan for human rights? Could information and training on the Convention be provided? Could more information about the lack of coordination among institutions be provided?
An Expert asked about allegations of corporal punishment against migrant workers in Indonesia?
Another Committee Expert asked how human rights provisions were being integrated into migration policies?
Response by National Human Rights Institutions
In response, the National Human Rights Commission of Mauritania said there were four temporary hosting centres for migrants, and around four visits had been carried out in 2025. During each visit, recommendations were submitted to the administration of the centre in a subsequent report. The Human Rights Commission had lost A status in 2017, but had regained and kept it between 2019 to the present. There were complaints mechanisms in place, where civil society organizations could visit the centres, but they needed to receive a permit to do so. However, the National Human Rights Commission did not need a permit.
Responding to questions, the National Human Rights Commission of Indonesia said regarding the law on immigration in Indonesia, while being amended three times, the provision criminalising entry and exit remained unchanged. The digital exploitation referred to cyber scams. Lack of data on migrant workers remained a key issue, and subsequently there was no data for migrant workers of transit and destination in Indonesia.
The National Human Rights Commission of Colombia said flights had been set up to reach the United States and assist those deported. The State had a reception protocol which supported the reception of these flights. However, there were no additional measures in this regard. Regarding Venezuelan migrants, there was a gap of 200,000 permits to be issued and many were still being processed. A measure was in place to allow those who had not yet received their temporary health care to have access to education and work. Those who had not yet received their permit did not have access to health care. Transit points were precarious which exacerbated the risks faced in these migration routes.
Adoption of Joint General Recommendations and General Comments on Eradicating Xenophobia Towards Migrants and Others Perceived as Such
FATIMATA DIALLO, Chair of the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, said the goal of the plenary was to formally adopt the Committee’s joint general comments seven and eight and the joint general recommendations thirty-eight and thirty-nine of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination on eradicating xenophobia towards migrants and others perceived as such. She thanked all those involved in developing the general comments and general recommendations, particularly the members of the task force for developing the recommendations, for their professionalism and dedication to the process.
MICHAL BALCERZAK, Chair of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, said there had been significant effort involved in developing these general comments and recommendations. He thanked all those involved in their development.
PABLO CERIANI CERNADAS, Vice-Chair of the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families and Co-Leader of the Task Force on the Development of the General Comments and Recommendations, thanked all those involved in developing the recommendations, including Committee Experts, the secretariats of both Committees, United Nations agencies, and members of civil society, including non-governmental organizations, national human rights institutions and universities, who had participated in hearings with the task force. The aim of the recommendations was to overturn the alarming trend being seen around the world in which the basic principles of international law were not being enforced and the rights of migrants were being violated in a vicious cycle.
IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Member of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and Co-Leader of the Task Force on the Development of the General Comments and Recommendations, said this was the first time that his Committee had participated in developing a joint general comment. He thanked all those involved in the process. He had met many people around the world while developing the recommendations, which addressed a complex problem. The world was seeing a rise in xenophobia and discrimination and both Committees hoped that this work would contribute to mitigating this scourge. Both Committees hoped that these documents would take on a life of their own.
EDGAR CORZO SOSA, Member of the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families and Member of the Task Force, said he was proud to be a member of the Committee at this important moment. The adoption of the joint general comments and general recommendations sent a very clear message that things could be done even in times of difficulty. He said his Committee was pleased to have worked with the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. The closer the Committees were, the stronger they would be.
VERENE ALBERTHA SHEPHERD, Vice-Chair of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and Members of their Families and Member of the Task Force, said this was her first experience of working closely with another treaty body. She congratulated all persons who had worked to develop the recommendations, despite the difficulties they had faced along the way.
RÉGINE ESSENEME, Vice-Chair of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and Members of their Families and Member of the Task Force, thanked the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families for asking her Committee to join in this work. The promotion and protection of human rights could only come through a truly holistic approach. The two Committees needed to find strategies to make these recommendations well-known and inform States of their need to implement them.
The joint general comments and general recommendations were then adopted.
___________
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
CMW25.007E