Migration is an inevitable part of today’s global landscape, with all regions of the world affected by escalating international migration flows. According to the 2005 United Nations World Migrant Stock Population database, there were 191 million documented migrants globally in 2005. This report has a two-pronged argument. First, it recognizes the potential benefits co- development can bring as a migration and development tool. It thus becomes imperative to conduct a comprehensive critical overview of co-development research and practices in order to ascertain the ways in which co-development has been historically deployed. Second, this report advances an explicitly gender-sensitive and gender-responsive co-development agenda; co-development is laudable in its attempts to amalgamate migration with development practices, but can only be a viable and effective policy option if it institutes gender mainstreaming in all of its operations.
International labour migration from developing to developed countries is considered a widespread phenomenon. As such, attempts at developing coherent co-development policies can be lauded as progressive because they make the effort to utilize migration to the benefit of both sending and receiving states, theoretically placing them, and all parties involved, in a mutually and equally beneficial relationship. Although co-development has numerous definitions and is applied in varying contexts, its main thrust is a “win-win” philosophy where labour migrants, their families in their communities of origin, sending countries, and receiving countries are able to accrue concrete economic and human development benefits (Chou 2005). I, therefore, recognize the potential benefits of co-development policies as migration and development tools. Nevertheless, in order to ascertain the ways in which co-development has been historically deployed, I present a comprehensive critical overview of co-development research and practices.
The Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council are independent human rights experts with mandates to report and advise on human rights from a thematic or country-specific perspective. The system of Special Procedures is a central element of the United Nations human rights machinery and covers all human rights: civil, cultural, economic, political, and social. In the context of the 2011 review of its work and functioning, the Human Rights Council reaffirmed the obligation of States to cooperate with the Special Procedures, and the integrity and independence of Special Procedures. It also reaffirmed the principles of cooperation, transparency and accountability and the role of the system of Special Procedures in enhancing the capacity of the Human Rights Council to address human rights situations. Member States confirmed their strong opposition to reprisals against persons cooperating with the United Nations and its human rights mechanism and representatives.
