Universal-MigrationHRlaw-PG-no-6-Publications-PractitionersGuide-2014-eng

MIGRATION AND INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW | 237
from violating it”. 942 There is also a “duty to take positive,
concrete measures geared towards fulfilment of the right to a
decent life, especially in the case of persons who are vulnerable
and at risk, whose care becomes a high priority”. 943
The European Court has held that neither the right to life
(Article 2 ECHR) nor any other provision of the ECHR “can
be interpreted as conferring on an individual a right to enjoy
any given standard of living”. 944 However, it has found that in
certain cases where, contrary to standards or duties in its own
national law, the State fails to provide for the basic material
needs of asylum seekers, the extreme poverty and destitution
that results, in combination with uncertainty as to how
long such destitution will continue, will violate the freedom
from inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 ECHR. 945
In such cases, the particular vulnerability of asylum seekers
and their need for particular protection by the State, are factors
that heighten the State’s obligations to provide them with
decent material conditions. 946
The European Committee on Social Rights has found that certain
rights of the European Social Charter (revised) are of fundamental
importance since they are connected to the right
to life, 947 and are therefore available to all on the territory,
despite the treaty limitation to citizens and migrants legally
present on the territory.
II. Specific rights of significance for migrants
This Section outlines the international human rights law jurisprudence
related to certain ESC rights that have particular significance for migrants,
and which may be useful in litigation on migrants’ rights. The
rights dealt with are the right to an adequate standard of living, including
the right to food, to water and sanitation and to adequate housing;
942 Street Children Case, IACtHR, op. cit., fn. 932, para. 144.
943 Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay, IACtHR, op. cit., fn. 932, para. 162.
944 Wasilewski v. Poland, ECtHR, Application No. 32734/96, Admissibility Decision, 20 April
1999, para. 3. See also, Pavlyulynets v. Ukraine, ECtHR, Application No. 70767/01, Judgment
of 6 September 2005, para. 28.
945 M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece, ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 324, paras. 250–263; Rahimi v. Greece,
ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 703, paras. 87–94.
946 Ibid., para. 251.
947 FIDH v. France, ECSR, op. cit., fn. 903, para. 30; DCI v. Belgium, ECSR, op. cit., fn. 904,
para. 33.