The protection of irregular migrants’ health-related rights brings to the fore the tensions that exist between human rights, citizenship and the sovereign state, and exposes the protection gaps in the international human rights regime. With this in mind, I consider the merits of a vulnerability analysis in international human rights law (ihrl). I posit that, detached from specific groups and reconceptualised as universal, vulnerability can be reclaimed as a foundation and tool of ihrl. I further contend that the deployment of a vulnerability analysis can alleviate the exclusionary dimension of ihrl and extend protections to irregular migrants. On this basis, I investigate the development of a vulnerability analysis in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. I argue that, in contrast with the Court’s vulnerable population approach, a vulnerability analysis can improve protection standards for irregular migrants in the field of health.
Finemansupra note 20 p. 16; L. Peroni and A. Timmer “Vulnerable groups: the promise of an emerging concept of European Human Rights Convention Law” International Journal of Constitutional Law 11(4) (2013) 1056–1085 p. 1071.
Finemanibid. p. 16.
Peroni and Timmersupra note 25 pp. 1073–1074; and Mary Keogh Noelin Fox and Eilionóir Flynn “How Far Towards Equality? A Vulnerabilities Aprroach to the Rights of Disabled People” 2010. ucd Working Papers in Law Criminology & Socio-Legal Studies Research Paper No. 29/2010. Retrieved 15 March 2014 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1634806.
See e.g. A. B. Kaplan“Father doesn’t always know best: rejecting paternalistic expansion of the direct threat defense to claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act”Dickinson Law Review106(2) (fall 2001) 389–414.
Finemansupra note 7 p. 8; Fineman supra note 20 p. 14. Fineman makes this point in the context of the us approach to equality.
Finemansupra note 20 p. 15. Although Fineman’s observations were made in the context of the us approach to equality these are relevant beyond the us context and to anti-discrimination laws and policies.
S. A. FitzGerald“Biopolitics and the regulation of vulnerability: the case of the female trafficked migrant”International Journal of Law in Context6(3) (2010) 277–294 p. 279.
Peroni and Timmersupra note 25 p. 1065. Peroni and Timmer describe these cases as ‘maldistribution cases’ (ibid.).
Timmersupra note 58 p. 164.
Timmersupra note 58 p. 162.
Timmersupra note 58 p. 168 (emphasis added).
Palmer makes a similar point; E. Palmer“Beyond arbitrary interference: the right to a home? Developing socio-economic duties in the European Convention on Human Rights”Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly61(3) (2010) 225–243 p. 242.