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

94 | PRACTITIONERS GUIDE No. 6permit, face increased vulnerability to exploitation. These situations cangive rise to a range of human rights issues for those concerned, andin particular women migrants who enter the country for purposes ofmarriage or family reunification. 226 For example, they may be unable orunwilling to seek protection from domestic violence or to leave abusiverelationships because their legal right to remain in a country is premisedon the relationship concerned. The limited rights often associatedwith family-reunification permits significantly can limit the ability ofholders to seek educational and/or employment opportunities, which inthe case of women who migrate for family reunification can perpetuatestereotyped gender-roles and give rise to integration difficulties. On theother hand, women who are the primary permit-holder may be at risk ofparticular violence if they seek to end relationships with partners whoseresidency rights are wholly connected with the relationship. 227As discussed at greater length in Chapter 6, similar risks can arise formigrants whose residency permit is linked to a particular employer, andwho may face heightened risks of violence and abuse at work and/ormay be unable or unwilling to seek legal protection. Indeed, CEDAWprovides in Article 2(f) that “when residency permits of women migrantworkers are premised on sponsorship of an employer or spouse, Statesparties should enact provisions relating to independent residency status.Regulations should be made to allow for the legal stay of a womanwho flees her abusive employer or spouse or is fired for complainingabout abuse”. 228As for the family members of a migrant worker, Article 50 ICRMW establishesthat, “[i]n the case of death of a migrant worker or dissolutionof marriage, the State of employment [of the migrant worker] shallfavourably consider granting family members of that migrant workerresiding in that State on the basis of family reunion an authorization tostay; the State of employment shall take into account the length of timethey have already resided in that State”.In recognition of the particular risks of human rights violations andabuses which may arise in these contexts, the Council of Europe, theCommittee of Ministers has recommended to Member States that, “aftera period of four years of legal residence, adult family members shouldbe granted an autonomous residence permit independent of that of theprincipal”, and that, “in the case of divorce, separation or death of theprincipal, a family member having been legally resident for at least oneyear may apply for an autonomous residence permit. Member States226 See, CEDAW, General Recommendation No. 26, op. cit., fn. 8, para. 22.227 E.g. see facts of Yildirim v. Austria, CEDAW, Communication No. 6/2005, Views of 6 August2007.228 See CEDAW, General Recommendation No. 26, op. cit., fn. 8, para. 26(f).