Asia Myanmar The military regime in
Myanmar has been criticized for allegations of restrictions to freedom of movement. These include restrictions on movement by political dissidents, women, and migrant workers. Many people move to places in which they do not have a local
hukou, but
local governments can restrict services like subsidized schooling,
subsidized housing, and
health insurance to those with local
hukou. The system was used as far back as the
Han dynasty for
tax collection, and more recently in the People's Republic to control
urbanization. The Hukou system has also led many municipal governments to disregard the welfare of
migrant workers as measures of wellbeing and economic progress are based almost exclusively on conditions for those with a local
hukou. Also, Chinese citizens are allowed to go from the mainland to
Hong Kong or
Macau 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. The
Tibetan Centre for Human Rights and Democracy claimed in 2000 that people in
Tibet had to promise not to criticize the
Chinese Communist Party before receiving official permission to leave for
India or
Nepal. Additionally, it alleged that people of
Han descent in Tibet have a far easier time acquiring the necessary permits to live in urban areas than ethnic Tibetans do.
Hong Kong and Macau As a part of the
one country, two systems policy proposed by
Deng Xiaoping and accepted by the British and Portuguese governments, the
special administrative regions (SARs) of
Hong Kong and
Macau retained separate border control and immigration policies with
mainland China.
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. Since then, restrictions imposed by the SAR governments have been the limiting factor on travel. Under
Basic 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."
India • Freedom to move freely throughout the territory of India though reasonable restrictions can be imposed on this right in the interest of the general public, for example, restrictions may be imposed on movement and travelling, so as to control epidemics. • Freedom to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India, which is subject to reasonable restrictions by the State in the interest of the general public, or for protection of the
scheduled tribes because certain safeguards, as are envisaged here, seem justified to protect indigenous and tribal peoples from exploitation and coercion.
Israel Israeli
Basic 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". 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. 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. Freedoms of movement within the West Bank and Gaza is not similarly protected and has been a source of controversy. 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
forced exile, and it is not used.
Kuwait Kuwait refuses admission to holders of Israeli passports as part of its
boycott against Israel. In 2015
Kuwait Airways cancelled its route between New York and London following a decision by the
U.S. Department of Transportation that the airline had engaged in discrimination by refusing to sell tickets to Israeli citizens. Direct flights between the US and Kuwait are not affected by this decision as Israeli citizens are not allowed to enter Kuwait.
North Korea Travel to North Korea is tightly controlled. The standard route to and from North Korea is by plane or train via
Beijing. Transport directly to and from
South 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.
Syria Syrian citizens are prohibited from exiting the country without special visas issued by government authorities. The
Syrian 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.". In its mandated report on human rights to the
United 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". 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." However, Syria has been criticized by groups, including
Amnesty 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. The
United Nations Human Rights Committee issues regular reports on human rights in Syria, including freedom of movement. 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. From July 2013, in certain villages in Syria (such as
Raqqa and
Deir el-Zour),
ISIS no longer allow women to appear in public alone, they must be accompanied by a male relative/guardian known as a
mahram. People who tried to leave ISIS territory were routinely tortured and executed.
Palestine The restriction of the movement of
Israelis and
Palestinians in Israel and the
West Bank by
Israel and the
Palestinian National Authority is an issue in the
Israeli–Palestinian conflict. In the mid-1990s, with the implementation of the
Oslo Accords and the division of the
West Bank into three separate
administrative 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. 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. While many such checkpoints are static, many are random, or move around frequently. Residents of Gaza are only allowed to travel to the West Bank in exceptional humanitarian cases, particularly urgent medical cases, but
not 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.
Africa Freedom of movement laws and restrictions vary from country to country on the African continent, however several international agreements beyond those prescribed by the
United 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: • Every individual shall have the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of a State provided he abides by the law. • Every individual shall have the right to leave any country including his own, and to return to his country. This right may only be subject to restrictions, provided for by law for the protection of national security, law and order, public health or morality. • Every individual shall have the right, when persecuted, to seek and obtain asylum in other countries in accordance with laws of those countries and international conventions. • A non-national legally admitted in a territory of a State Party to the present Charter, may only be expelled from it by virtue of a decision taken in accordance with the law. • The mass expulsion of non-nationals shall be prohibited. Mass expulsion shall be that which is aimed at national, racial, ethnic or religious groups. 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.
South Africa Under
apartheid, freedom of movement for nonwhites was limited by
pass laws beginning with the
Natives (Urban Areas) Act 1923 requiring black men to have a pass with them to enter cities. After the
National Party imposed
apartheid in the 1950s, these laws were expanded to prohibit all non-whites from remaining in cities for longer than 72 hours. Beyond the African Charter on Human and People's Rights, the
Constitution of South Africa also contains express freedoms of movement, in section 21 of
Chapter 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 a
passport, critical to full exercise of the freedom of movement internationally. Freedom of movement in France is ruled both by the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and the
Schengen 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 a
hotel room. This law does not exist anymore however. 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 an
opt-out), and to
Norway,
Iceland,
Switzerland and
Liechtenstein as these countries own an associated status towards the EU. As
European citizens, French people are free to go to one European country to another without restrictions. 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.
Ireland In
Ireland, the
Thirteenth Amendment was adopted in November 1992 by
referendum in order to ensure freedom of movement in the specific circumstance of a woman traveling abroad to receive an
abortion. However, with the successful repeal of the
Eighth Amendment of the
Irish Constitution on 25 May 2018, which ensures the right to an abortion, this previous amendment is no longer necessary.
Italy In
Italy, freedom of movement is enshrined in Article 16 of the
Constitution, which states: "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."
Poland Polish nationals holding
dual citizenship are required to use Polish travel documents (a
Polish passport or, within the European Union, a
Polish National ID card (Dowód osobisty)) while travelling in the
Schengen Area. Poland requires all
Polish 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.
Russia Article 27 of The
Russian 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." Freedom of movement of Russian citizens around the country is legally limited in a number of situations, including the following: • In
closed cities (mainly nuclear research centers). Special permits are necessary for both visiting and settling there. • In
certain areas near Russia's international border. • In areas with declared
state of emergency. • In the interests of justice (imprisonment, bailiff's order, arrest, undertaking not to leave during a criminal investigation etc.). • For citizens under
military conscription. Since the abandonment of
propiska 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. 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. 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: • The case of obtaining access to classified documents while working for the state or the military, during the time when access is granted and up to 5 years afterwards. This limitation is commonly included as a provision in one's contract of employment. • Detention on being prosecuted as a defendant or suspicion of committing a crime. • Military conscription. According to the 62 article of the
Russian 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". 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.
Serbia Everyone has the right to move and settle freely in the
Republic 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 of
criminal proceedings, protection of public order and peace, prevention of the spread of infectious diseases, or
defense of the Republic of Serbia. Turkey According to Article 23 of the
Turkish Constitution, each individual in the
Republic 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.
United Kingdom Britons have long enjoyed a comparatively high level of freedom of movement. Apart from
Magna Carta, the protection of rights and liberties in this field has tended to come from the
common law rather than formal
constitutional codes and conventions, and can be changed by Parliament without the protection of being
entrenched 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 amended
Human Rights Act.
North America Canada The
Constitution of Canada contains mobility rights expressly in
section 6 of the
Canadian 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 and
permanent 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's
notwithstanding clause. Canada's
Social 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."
Saint Martin In the island of
Saint Martin, divided between
Sint Maarten (part of the
Netherlands) and the
Collectivity of Saint Martin (part of France), freedom of movement is allowed between both halves of the island as stated in the 1648
Treaty of Concordia. It is possible that this may have influenced the development of a common identity in the island, which has led to
a proposed unification of it.
United States Freedom of movement under
United States law is governed primarily by the
Privileges and Immunities Clause of the
United 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 the
circuit court ruling in
Corfield v. Coryell, 6 Fed. Cas. 546 (1823), freedom of movement has been judicially recognized as a fundamental Constitutional right. In
Paul 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." However, the
Supreme 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 as
Ward v. Maryland, 79 U.S. 418 (1871), the
Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873) and
United States v. Harris, 106 U.S. 629 (1883). Internationally, § 215 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (currently
codified at
8 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. The State Department refused to issue passports to citizens who declined to swear that they were not Communists. This practice was ended following the 1958 Supreme Court Case
Kent v. Dulles. Until 1 July 2016,
Norfolk Island had immigration controls separate from those of the remainder of Australia and a permit was required for
Australian citizens or residents to enter. In August 2014 the Australian
Commonwealth Government proposed regulating the rights of Australian citizens to travel to and from designated areas associated with
terrorism. == See also ==