CYIL 2015

ŠÁRKA OŠŤÁDALOVÁ CYIL 6 ȍ2015Ȏ identify the scope of proposed regulation of their position within the recent system of international law, or to determine its possible substance de lege ferenda . Secondly, it focuses on the existing subsidiary system of the protection of rights of forced migrants, the basis of which lies in international human rights law; it identifies the key areas where this branch of international law can contribute to the protection of rights and the position of forced migrants in a situation when another – more relevant and concrete – regulation is missing. The publication is divided into five parts.The first part, written by Věra Honusková, provides the basic introduction to the issue of improper refugees and to their specific position in recent international law. It stresses the fact that the sources and forms of forced migration significantly exceed the scope of the Convention on the Status of Refugees, which was adopted in reaction to repeated massive waves of forced migrants escaping persecution in their country of origin. Contemporary international law either has no response to the “new” forms of forced migration, or it is very slow in finding any answer. The two following parts of the publication deal with two specific categories of forced migrants: environmental refugees and war refugees. Regarding the issue of environmental refugees, it is pointed out that two main forms of sources of migration may be identified. The first group consists of migrants who are forced to leave due to long-term deteriorating natural conditions in their country of origin, gradually depriving them of any chance to live physically (climatological changes, land becoming non-arable, deterioration of waters, or total extinction of the territory). The situation of such refugees and possible solutions, or lack thereof, offered by contemporary international law are described by the example of migrants from so-called drowning islands. It is obvious that international law has not even started to form a response to the situation of these improper migrants. The debates have been pursued at the doctrinal level; however, as suggested by the chapter of Milan Lipovský, the debates’ conclusions have failed to suggest any satisfying solution to the situation of these refugees without adopting new international regulation. The first judgments of courts of New Zealand deciding on applications for international protection of migrants from drowning islands, considered in detail by Barbora Matějková in her chapter, clearly show that the existing legal framework of the Convention on the Status of Refugees is absolutely insufficient. The second group is composed of migrants as part of urgency migration situations caused by natural disasters. As Pavel Šturma suggests in his chapter, the need has been officially recognized to adopt a more detailed legal regulation aimed at solving not only the consequence of, but also the reasons for, forced migration due to natural disasters: the International Law Commission has been working on a possible response to the issue. The Commission has been preparing the Draft Articles for the protection of persons in the event of disasters; the Draft Articles indicate a possible direction of proper international regulation of the response of states to the situation of persons

424