Freedom of movement,mobility rights, or theright to travel is ahuman rights concept encompassing the right of individuals to travel from place to place within theterritory of acountry,[1] and to leave the country and return to it. The right includes not only visiting places, but changing the place where the individual resides or works.[1][2]
Such a right is provided in theconstitutions of numerousstates, and in documents reflecting norms ofinternational law. For example, Article 13 of theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights asserts that:
Some people and organizations advocate an extension of the freedom of movement to includefree migration between countries.[4][5] The freedom of movement is restricted in a variety of ways by various governments and may even vary within the territory of a single country.[1] Such restrictions are generally based on public health, order, or safety justifications and postulate that the right to these conditions preempts the notion of freedom of movement.[6]
Restrictions on international travel on people (immigration or emigration) are commonplace.[6] Within countries, freedom of travel is often more limited for minors, andpenal law can modify this right as it applies to persons charged with or convicted of crimes (for example,parole,probation, registration).[7] In some countries, freedom of movement has historically been limited for women, and for members of disfavored racial and social groups.[7] Circumstances, both legal and practical, may operate to limit this freedom. For example, a nation that is generally permissive with respect to travel may restrict that right during time ofwar.
Restrictions may include the following:
In some jurisdictions, questions have arisen as to the extent to which a private owner of land can exclude certain persons from land which is used for public purposes, such as ashopping mall or apark. There is also a rule of law that a landowner whose property has no public access can be awarded aneasement to cross private land if necessary to reach his own property. Conversely, public nuisance laws prevent alternate use of publicstreets designated forpublic transit from being used forblock parties and playing basketball.
Parents or otherlegal guardians are typically able to restrict the movements of minor children under their care, and of other adults who have been legally deemed incompetent to govern their own movement. Employers may legally set some restrictions on the movements of employees, and terminate employment if those restrictions are breached.
Governments may generally sharply restrict the freedom of movement of persons who have been convicted of crimes, most conspicuously in the context of imprisonment. Restrictions may also be placed on convicted criminals who are onprobation or have been released onparole. Persons who have been charged with crimes and have been released on bail may also be prohibited from traveling. Amaterial witness may also be denied the right to travel.
Though travelling to and from countries is generally permitted (with some limitations), most governments restrict the length of time that temporary visitors may stay in the country. This can be dependent on country of citizenship and country travelled to among other factors. In some instances (such as those ofrefugees who are at risk of immediate bodily harm on return to their country or those seeking asylum), indefinite stay may be allowed onhumanitarian grounds, but in most other cases, stay is generally limited. One notable exception to this is thefree movement of people in the European Union, where citizens of any country in the EU and EFTA generally enjoy indefinite stay in other EU/EFTA countries.
Furthermore, restrictions on the right to relocate or live in certain areas of a country have been imposed in several countries, most prominently China.[8]
In achild custody dispute, a court may place restrictions on the movement of a minor child, thereby restricting the ability of the parents of that child to travel with their child.
TheVisa Restrictions Index ranks countries based on the number of other countries its citizens are free to enter without visa. Most countries in the world require visas or some other form of entrance permit for non-citizens to enter their territory.[7] Those who enter countries in defiance of regulations requiring such documentation are often subject to imprisonment or deportation.[5][9]
Most countries require that their citizens leave the country on a valid passport, travel document issued by an international organization or, in some cases, identification document. Conditions of issuance and the governments' authority to deny issuance of a passport vary from country to country.
Under certain circumstances, countries may issue travel documents (such aslaissez-passer) to aliens, that is, to persons other than their own citizens.
Having a passport issued does not guarantee the right to exit the country. A person may be prohibited to exit a country on a number of reasons, such as being under investigation as a suspect, serving a criminal sentence, being a debtor in default,[10] or posing a threat to national security. This applies to aliens as well.
In some countries prohibition to leave may take the form of revocation of a previously issued passport. For example, theUnited States of America may revoke passports at will.[11]
Some countries, such as the formerSoviet Union, further required that their citizens, and sometimes foreign travelers, obtain anexit visa to be allowed to leave the country.
Currently, some countries require that foreign citizens have valid visas upon leaving the country if they needed one to enter. For example, a person who overstayed a visa inCzech Republic may need to obtain an exit visa. InRussia, the inconvenience goes even further as the legislation there does not formally recognize residency permits as valid visas; thus, foreign citizens lawfully residing in Russia need to obtain "exit-entry" visas in order to do a trip abroad. This, in particular, affects foreign students, whose original entry visas expire by the time they return home.
Citizens of thePeople's Republic of China who are residents of themainland are required to apply forexit and entry endorsements in order to enter thespecial administrative regions ofHong Kong andMacau (and SAR residents require aHome Return Permit to visit the mainland). Since 2016, residents of theXinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region have been required to deposit their passports with the police. Each trip abroad must be approved by the government, which is more difficult for members of theUyghur ethnic group.[12]
Saudi Arabia andQatar require all resident foreigners, but not citizens, to obtain an exit visa before leaving the country.[13]
WhenAugustus established theRoman Empire in 27 BC, he assumed monarchical powers over the new Roman province ofEgypt and was able to prohibitsenators from traveling there without his permission. However, Augustus would also allow more liberty to travel at times. During afamine in 6 AD, he attempted to relieve strain on the food supply by granting senators the liberty to leaveRome and to travel to wherever they wished.[14]
InEngland, in 1215, the right to travel was enshrined in Article 42 of theMagna Carta:
In theHoly Roman Empire, a measure instituted byJoseph II in 1781 permittedserfs freedom of movement.
Theserfs of theRussian Empire were not given their personal freedom untilAlexander II'sEdict of Emancipation of 1861. At the time, most of the inhabitants of Russia, not only the serfs but also townsmen and merchants, did not have freedom of movement and were confined to their places of residence.[15]
After the end of hostilities inWorld War II, theUnited Nations was established on 24 October 1945. The new international organization recognized the importance of freedom of movement through documents such as theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and theInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966). Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by theU.N. General Assembly, reads,
Article 12 of theInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights incorporates this right into treaty law:
The ICCPR entered into force for the initial ratifying states on 23 March 1976, and for additional states following their ratification. In 1999, theU.N. Human Rights Committee, which is charged with interpreting the treaty, issued its guidelines for Article 12 of the ICCPR in its "General Comment No. 27: Freedom of Movement".[9]
While the treaty sets out the freedom of movement in broad and absolute terms, part four of Article 12 of the ICCPR admits that these freedoms may be restricted for a variety of reasons in the public interest. This clause is often cited to justify a wide variety of movement restrictions by almost every country that is party to it.[9]
During theCOVID-19 pandemic, restrictions on freedom of movement were implemented by many of the world's governments.
The countries of theCommonwealth of Independent States have concluded a number of agreements among themselves in the field of citizens'mobility rights, which regulate visa-free travel, recognition of documents, cooperation in the field of employment and the common labor market. Usually a travel passport is required for abroad visits, unless there are other agreements that a national identity document or internal passport is valid (a common market is a lesser degree of integration than a single market and separate agreements are more restrictive than the provisions of a single market).
TheEurasian Economic Union overlaps with the Commonwealth of Independent States.
The single market has provided for the free movement of labor without work permits for the worker and his or her family members since 2012, including access to health care and recognition of educational credentials. The national identity document or internal passport is valid within the Union (a single market is a deeper degree of integration than a common market).
TheCommonwealth of Independent States overlaps with the Eurasian Economic Union.
Within theEuropean Union, residents are guaranteed the right to freely move within the EU's internal borders by theTreaty on the Functioning of the European Union and theEuropean Parliament and CouncilDirective 2004/38/EC of 29 April 2004.[16] Union residents are given the right to enter any member state for up to three months with a validpassport ornational identity card, and over three months with evidence of "sufficient resources... not to become a burden on the social assistance system". If the citizen does not have a travel document, the member state must afford them every facility in obtaining the documents. Under no circumstances can an entry or exit visa be required. There are some security limitations[17] and public policy restrictions on extended stays by EU residents. For instance, a member state may require that persons register their presence in the country "within a reasonable and non-discriminatory period of time". In general, however, the burden of notification and justification lies with the state. EU citizens also earn a right to permanent residence in member states they have maintained an uninterrupted five-year period of legal residence. This residency cannot be subject to any conditions, and is lost only by two successive years absence from the host nation. Family members of EU residents, in general, also acquire the same freedom of travel rights as the resident they accompany, though they may be subject to a short-stay visa requirement.[16] Furthermore, no EU citizen may be declared permanentlypersona non grata within the European Union, or permanently excluded from entry by any member state.
Freedom of movement for workers is a policy chapter of theacquis communautaire of theEuropean Union. It is part of thefree movement of persons and one of thefour economic freedoms:free movement of goods,services,labour andcapital. Article 45TFEU (ex 39 and 48) states that:
A different arrangement amongst 29 European countries, covers some but not allEuropean Union member states together with some non-member states. The arrangement allows visa-free travel between the countries in this area, in general without border controls. A foreign national who holds a visa issued by any of these countries can travel freely within the area.
The Nordic Passport Union allows citizens of the Nordic countries – Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and Finland – to travel and reside in another Nordic country without any travel documentation (e.g. a passport or national identity card) or a residence permit. Since 25 March 2001, all five states are also in the Schengen Area.[19]
TheMercosur alliance betweenArgentina,Bolivia,Brazil,Paraguay andUruguay includes a freedom of movement area between its member states and five other associate states. Citizens don't require a passport to travel through other Mercosur or associate countries. Freedom of movement also extends to certain associated countries (Chile,Colombia,Ecuador andPeru), citizens of which can also travel to their territories without the need of a passport..
TheCentral America-4 Border Control Agreement abolished in 2006 land border checks amongEl Salvador,Guatemala,Honduras, andNicaragua. The countries have adopted a harmonized external border and visitor policy.
TheTrans-Tasman Travel Arrangement betweenAustralia andNew Zealand allows citizens of each country to move between, and work within, the two countries with few limitations. The arrangement also extends to holders of permanent resident and resident return visas of Australia.
TheCommon Travel Area arrangements allow citizens of theUnited Kingdom andIreland, and otherBritish nationals resident in theIsle of Man and theChannel Islands, to travel freely in this area. The arrangements also extend to certain foreign nationals who hold visas issued by these countries.
Saudi,Omani,Kuwaiti,Bahraini,Qatari,Emirati -Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) citizens do not need a visa to enter each other's countries and they also have the right to work in each GCC country. GCC citizens can use a GCC national identity card (rather than a passport) to travel between these states.
Freedom of movement between Russia and Belarus for local citizens exists similar to that which exists for British and Irish citizens within the Common Travel Area.
Citizens of theFSM,Marshall Islands,Palau, and theUnited States may enter, reside, study and work in each respective country indefinitely without a visa.
Citizens of certain countries in the Caribbean (Antigua and Barbuda, Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada, Montserrat, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines) may enter, reside, study and work in each respective country indefinitely without a visa.[20]
Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Member States -Barbados, Belize, Dominica and St. Vincent and the Grenadines- have implemented full Free Movement of their nationals among themselves from 01 October 2025. This means nationals of those four countries have the unrestricted right to live and work in said countries, with no time limits or visas.
The military regime inMyanmar has been criticized for allegations of restrictions to freedom of movement.[21] These include restrictions on movement by political dissidents,[22] women,[8] and migrant workers.[8]
In the mainland of thePeople's Republic of China, thehukou system of household registration makesinternal migration difficult, especially forrural residents to move tourban areas.[23][24] Many people move to places in which they do not have a localhukou, butlocal governments can restrict services like subsidized schooling,subsidized housing, andhealth insurance to those with localhukou.[25][26][27][28] The system was used as far back as theHan dynasty fortax collection, and more recently in the People's Republic to controlurbanization.[25] The Hukou system has also led many municipal governments to disregard the welfare ofmigrant workers as measures of wellbeing and economic progress are based almost exclusively on conditions for those with a localhukou.[27]
Also, Chinese citizens are allowed to go from the mainland toHong Kong orMacau only for travel, but not for residence unless they obtain the "one-way permit" from Chinese authorities. Currently, the issuance of the "one-way permit" is limited to 150 per day.[citation needed]
TheTibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democracy claimed in 2000 that people inTibet had to promise not to criticize theChinese Communist Party before receiving official permission to leave forIndia orNepal.[29] Additionally, it alleged that people ofHan descent in Tibet have a far easier time acquiring the necessary permits to live in urban areas than ethnic Tibetans do.[30]
As a part of theone country, two systems policy proposed byDeng Xiaoping and accepted by the British and Portuguese governments, thespecial administrative regions (SARs) ofHong Kong andMacau retained separate border control and immigration policies withmainland China.[31]Chinese nationals had to gain permission from the government before travelling to Hong Kong or Macau, but this requirement was officially abolished for each SAR after its respective handover.[failed verification][[[People's Republic of China Permit for Proceeding to Hong Kong and Macao#{{{section}}}|contradictory]]] Since then, restrictions imposed by the SAR governments have been the limiting factor on travel.[citation needed]
UnderBasic Law of Hong Kong article 31, "Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of movement within the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and freedom of immigration to other countries and regions. They shall have freedom to travel and to enter or leave the Region. Unless restrained by law, holders of valid travel documents shall be free to leave the Region without special authorization."
IsraeliBasic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, which has quasi-constitutional status, declares that "there shall be no deprivation or restriction of the liberty of a person by imprisonment, arrest, extradition or otherwise"; that "all persons are free to leave Israel"; and that "every Israeli national has the right of entry into Israel from abroad".[32] In practice,stay of exit orders are liberally issued by Israel courts, including on non-custodial fathers who are not in arrears in child support.[33][34] In March 2012 a corruption scandal led to the arrest of two officials for allegedly having taken bribes to circumvent court ordered "no exit" travel abroad bans.[35][36] Freedoms of movement within the West Bank and Gaza is not similarly protected and has been a source of controversy.[37][38]
TheConstitution provides for the freedom of movement within the country, foreign travel, immigration, and repatriation, and theGovernment generally respects them in practice.[39] Citizens have the right to travel freely both within the country and abroad, to change their place of residence, to emigrate, and to repatriate voluntarily.Citizenship may be forfeited by naturalization in a foreign country or by failure of persons born with dual nationality to elect citizenship at the required age. The law does not permit forcedexile, and it is not used.[40]
Kuwait refuses admission to holders of Israeli passports as part of itsboycott against Israel.[41] In 2015Kuwait Airways cancelled its route between New York and London following a decision by theU.S. Department of Transportation that the airline had engaged in discrimination by refusing to sell tickets to Israeli citizens.[42] Direct flights between the US and Kuwait are not affected by this decision as Israeli citizens are not allowed to enter Kuwait.[43]
Travel to North Korea is tightly controlled. The standard route to and from North Korea is by plane or train viaBeijing. Transport directly to and fromSouth Korea was possible on a limited scale from 2003 until 2008, when a road was opened (bus tours, no private cars). Freedom of Movement within North Korea is also limited, as citizens are not allowed to move around freely inside their country.[44][45]
Syrian citizens are prohibited from exiting the country without special visas issued by government authorities.[46][47]
TheSyrian Constitution states "Every citizen has the right to liberty of movement within the territory of the State unless prohibited therefrom under the terms of a court order or public health and safety regulations.".[48] In its mandated report on human rights to theUnited Nations, Syria has argued that because of this constitutional protection: "in Syria, no laws or measures restrict the liberty of movement or choice of residence of citizens".[49] Legislative Decree No. 29 of 1970 regulates the right of foreigners to enter, reside in and leave the territory of Syria, and is the controlling document regarding the issuance of passports, visas, and diplomatic travel status. The document specifically states "The latter provision is intended merely to ensure that our country is not the final destination of stateless persons."[50]
However, Syria has been criticized by groups, includingAmnesty International for restrictions to freedom of movement. In August 2005, Amnesty International released an "appeal case", citing several freedom of movement restrictions including exit restriction without explanation, refusal to issue passports to political dissidents, detention, restriction from entering certain structures, denial of travel documents, and denial of nationality.[51] TheUnited Nations Human Rights Committee issues regular reports on human rights in Syria, including freedom of movement.[52]
There are certain restrictions on movement placed on Women, for example Syrian law now allows males to place restrictions on certain female relatives. Women over the age of 18 are entitled to travel outside of Syria, however a woman's husband may file a request for his wife to be banned from leaving the country.[53] From July 2013, in certain villages in Syria (such asRaqqa andDeir el-Zour),ISIS no longer allow women to appear in public alone, they must be accompanied by a male relative/guardian known as amahram. People who tried to leave ISIS territory were routinely tortured and executed.[54]
The restriction of the movement ofIsraelis andPalestinians in Israel and theWest Bank byIsrael and thePalestinian National Authority is one issue in theIsrael–Palestine conflict. In the mid-1990s, with the implementation of theOslo Accords and the division of theWest Bank into three separateadministrative divisions, Israeli freedom of movement was limited by law. Israel says that the regime of restrictions is necessary to protect Israelis both in Israel proper and in the West Bank.[55]
Checkpoints exist throughout and at entrances and exits to the West Bank that limit the movement of non-Israelis on the basis of nationality, age, and sex among other criteria.[38][56] While many such checkpoints are static, many are random, or move around frequently.[56] Full closures of the West Bank to any entrance or exit are frequent, generally taking place on Jewish Holidays.[37]
Residents of Gaza are only allowed to travel to the West Bank in exceptional humanitarian cases, particularly urgent medical cases, butnot including marriage. It is possible to travel from the West Bank to Gaza only if the person pledges to permanently relocating to Gaza. Gazan residents are only admitted to Israel in exceptional humanitarian cases. Since 2008, they are not allowed to live or stay in Israel because of marriage with an Israeli. Israelis who want to visit their partner in Gaza need permits for a few months, and Israelis can visit their first‐degree relatives in Gaza only in exceptional humanitarian cases.[57]
Freedom of movement laws and restrictions vary from country to country on the African continent, however several international agreements beyond those prescribed by theUnited Nations govern freedom of movement within the African continent.The African Charter on Human and People's Rights Article 12 outlines various forms of movement-related freedoms. It asserts:[58]
The ideals of the Charter are, in principle, supported by all signatory governments, though they are not rigorously followed. There have been attempts to have intellectuals recognized as having special freedom of movement rights, to protect their intellectual ideals as they cross national boundaries.[59]
Underapartheid, freedom of movement for nonwhites was limited bypass laws beginning with theNatives (Urban Areas) Act 1923 requiring black men to have a pass with them to enter cities. After theNational Party imposedapartheid in the 1950s, these laws were expanded to prohibit all non-whites from remaining in cities for longer than 72 hours.[60] Beyond the African Charter on Human and People's Rights, theConstitution of South Africa also contains express freedoms of movement, in section 21 ofChapter 2. Freedom of movement is guaranteed to "everyone" in regard to leaving the country but is limited to citizens when entering it or staying in it. Citizens also have a right to apassport, critical to full exercise of the freedom of movement internationally.[61][58]
Many countries mention freedom of movement in their constitutional texts, but France does not.[62] Freedom of movement in France is ruled both by theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and theSchengen Agreement of 1990, promoting freedom of movement and no more borders controls for European citizen on the European territory.
In theory,citizens in France are free to travel without any police control on the national territory. Although until the 1980s any person (either tourists or French citizens) had to fill up an information sheet then given to the police, writing on it its personal situation before booking ahotel room. This law does not exist anymore however.[63]
Since the Schengen Agreement in 1990, freedom of movement slightly spread to 25 countries of the European Union (Cyprus is not a member yet;Ireland maintains anopt-out), and toNorway,Iceland,Switzerland andLiechtenstein as these countries own an associated status towards the EU. AsEuropean citizens, French people are free to go to one European country to another without restrictions.[64]
France is one of the most welcomed countries in the world. Citizens are indeed able to travel to 186 destinations in the world, making France one of the most welcomed countries according to the Henley passport index.[65]
InIreland, theThirteenth Amendment was adopted in November 1992 byreferendum in order to ensure freedom of movement in the specific circumstance of a woman traveling abroad to receive anabortion. However, with the successful repeal of theEighth Amendment of theIrish Constitution on 25 May 2018, which ensures the right to an abortion, this previous amendment is no longer necessary.
InItaly, freedom of movement is enshrined in Article 16 of theConstitution, which states:[66]
"Every citizen has the right to reside and travel freely in any part of the country, except for such general limitations as may be established by law for reasons of health or security. No restriction may be imposed for political reasons. Every citizen is free to leave the territory of the republic and return to it, notwithstanding any legal obligations."[66]
Uniquely, theNorwegian special territory ofSvalbard is anentirely visa-free zone under the terms of theSvalbard Treaty.[67]
Polish nationals holdingdual citizenship are required to use Polish travel documents (aPolish passport or, within the European Union, aPolish National ID card (Dowód osobisty)) while travelling in theSchengen Area.[68]
Poland requires allPolish citizens (including foreign citizens who are, who can be claimed to or are suspected to hold Polish citizenship) to enter and depart Poland using Polish travel documents.[69]
Article 27 of TheRussian Constitution states that "1.Every who legally stays in the territory of the Russian Federation shall have the right to free travel, choice of place of stay or residence. 2.Everyone may freely leave the Russian Federation.Citizens of the Russian Federation shall have the right to freely return to the Russian Federation."[70]
Freedom of movement of Russian citizens around the country is legally limited in a number of situations, including the following:
Since the abandonment ofpropiska system in 1993, new legislation on registration of residence was passed. Unlike propiska, which was a permit to reside in a certain area, registration of residence as worded in the law is merely notification.[76] According to the Russian legislation, there are two types of registration which a person may obtain simultaneously. Permanent registration is obligatory and gives the right for property ownership, temporary registration can be received for a period of time due to rental contract. However, administrative procedures developed "in implementation" of the registration law imposed some conditions on registration which effectively made it depend on the landlord's assent. Since landlords are often not willing to register tenants or guests in their properties due to tax payments, many internal migrants are prevented from performing their legal duty to register.[77] Before 2004, it was common for police to fine those having failed to register within 3 working days at a place of stay. In 2004, the maximum permitted registration lag was raised to 90 days making prosecution infeasible, removing practical obstacles to free movement.
The Russian citizens' right to leave Russia may be legally suspended on a number of reasons including:
According to the 62 article of theRussian Constitution, citizen of Russia may have the citizenship of a foreign State (dual citizenship), but that does not "free him from the obligations stipulated by the Russian citizenship".[79] Russian citizens possessing foreign citizenship may not enter or leave Russia on foreign travel documents. Russian consular offices do not grant visas to foreign passport holders who are (or are suspected to be) Russian citizens.[80]
Everyone has the right to move and settle freely in theRepublic of Serbia, to leave it, and to return to it.
Freedom of movement and residence and the right to leave the Republic of Serbia may be restricted by the law if this is necessary for the conduct ofcriminal proceedings, protection of public order and peace, prevention of the spread of infectious diseases, ordefense of the Republic of Serbia.[81]
According to Article 23 of theTurkish Constitution, each individual in theRepublic of Turkey has the right to travel from one place to another.
The freedom of a citizen to travel abroad may be restricted due to his / her citizenship duty or criminal investigation or prosecution.
Citizens can neither be deported nor denied entry into the country.[82]
Britons have long enjoyed a comparatively high level of freedom of movement. Apart fromMagna Carta, the protection of rights and liberties in this field has tended to come from thecommon law rather than formalconstitutional codes and conventions, and can be changed by Parliament without the protection of beingentrenched in a constitution.
It has been proposed that a range of specific state restrictions on freedom of movement should be prohibited under a new or comprehensively amendedHuman Rights Act.[83] The new basic legal prohibitions could include: road tolls and other curbs on freedom of travel and private vehicle ownership and use; personal identity cards (internal passports, citizenship licenses) that must be produced on demand for individuals to access public services and facilities; and legal requirements for citizens to register changes of address or partner with the state authorities.[83]
TheConstitution of Canada contains mobility rights expressly insection 6 of theCanadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The rights specified include the right of citizens to leave and enter the country and the right of both citizens andpermanent residents to move within its boundaries. However, the subsections protect poorer regions'affirmative action programs that favour residents who have lived in the region for longer. Section 6 mobility rights are among the select rights that cannot be limited by the Charter'snotwithstanding clause.
Canada'sSocial Union Framework Agreement, an agreement between governments made in 1999, affirms that "All governments believe that the freedom of movement of Canadians to pursue opportunities anywhere in Canada is an essential element of Canadian citizenship." In the Agreement, it is pledged that "Governments will ensure that no new barriers to mobility are created in new social policy initiatives."[84]
In the island ofSaint Martin, divided betweenSint Maarten (part of theNetherlands) and theCollectivity of Saint Martin (part of France), freedom of movement is allowed between both halves of the island as stated in the 1648Treaty of Concordia. It is possible that this may have influenced the development of a common identity in the island, which has led toa proposed unification of it.[85]
Freedom of movement underUnited States law is governed primarily by thePrivileges and Immunities Clause of theUnited States Constitution which states, "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States." As far back as thecircuit court ruling inCorfield v. Coryell,6 Fed. Cas. 546 (1823), freedom of movement has been judicially recognized as a fundamental Constitutional right. InPaul v. Virginia, 75 U.S. 168 (1869), the Court defined freedom of movement as "right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them."[86] However, theSupreme Court did not invest the federal government with the authority to protect freedom of movement. Under the "privileges and immunities" clause, this authority was given to the states, a position the Court held consistently through the years in cases such asWard v. Maryland, 79 U.S. 418 (1871), theSlaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873) andUnited States v. Harris, 106 U.S. 629 (1883).[87][88]
Internationally, § 215 of theImmigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (currentlycodified at8 U.S.C.§ 1185), it is unlawful for a United States citizen to enter or exit the United States without a valid United States passport.[89]
The State Department refused to issue passports to citizens who declined to swear that they were not Communists.[90]: 12 This practice was ended following the 1958 Supreme Court CaseKent v. Dulles.[90]: 12
No federal Australian legislation guarantees freedom of movement within theCommonwealth of Australia. Various Australian laws restrict the right on various grounds.[91][92] Until 1 July 2016,Norfolk Island had immigration controls separate from those of the remainder of Australia and a permit was required forAustralian citizens or residents to enter. In August 2014 the AustralianCommonwealth Government proposed regulating the rights of Australian citizens to travel to and from designated areas associated withterrorism.[93]
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link){{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link){{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link){{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link){{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)Australia's government yesterday announced plans to regulate travel to terrorist hotbeds such as Iraq and Syria as part of a raft of counterterrorism measures aimed at addressing the domestic threat posed by war-hardened homegrown Islamic extremists.
{{cite news}}:Missing or empty|title= (help)| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Other | |
