Introduction
Imagine sacrificing everything to cross an international border in pursuit of an honest living, only to face severe exploitation behind the closed doors of a private residence. Behind these doors, a migrant woman’s identity is erased the moment her employer seizes her passport. Her wages are stolen, her movements are heavily restricted, and her legal status is weaponized against her. There is a looming threat of deportation used to enforce absolute silence. When she finally breaks free and steps out to seek justice, the courtroom will be her only salvation. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. It represents the grim reality for countless migrant women worldwide.
On June 17, 2026, the International Association of Women Judges (IAWJ), in partnership with the International Organization for Migration (IOM), convened a global dialogue to confront these harrowing realities. The webinar provided a comprehensive discussion of International Migration Law (IML), the structural barriers that silence migrant women, and the urgent, life-saving role judicial actors play in translating international laws into actionable domestic justice.
The following are the featured distinguished roster of speakers:
• Eulàlia Figueras, Senior International Migration Law Specialist at the IOM.
• Alaa Kassim, Gender-Based Violence Officer with the IOM’s Migrant Protection Unit.
• Hon. Dr. Ifa Sudewi, Chief Justice of the Jambi High Court in Indonesia and Secretary of the Indonesian Women Judges Association; and
• Hon. Jacqueline Joas Rugemalila, Principal Resident Magistrate in Tanzania.
The International Migration Law Framework
International Migration Law (IML) functions as a comprehensive compilation of public international law. It draws heavily from human rights law, refugee law, transnational criminal law, and labor conventions. Eulàlia Figueras emphasized that while states possess the sovereign authority to manage migration, international obligations strictly limit this sovereignty. IML establishes the necessary standards to balance state prerogatives with the fundamental rights of migrants.
This IML framework is dynamic and continuously evolving. Rather than being a closed legal system, it regularly intersects with other branches of international law to address new global challenges. For instance, IML increasingly incorporates elements of environmental and disaster reduction law as climate-driven displacement grows. It also extends into highly practical sectors like aviation law, where training pilots and airline staff play a critical role in identifying and combating human trafficking. Ultimately, this adaptability and broad scope are what make the IML framework so effective.
A central challenge in applying these protections involves legal categorization. The IOM advocates for an inclusive definition of migrants, recognizing that individuals frequently transition through multiple legal statuses during their journeys—beginning as asylum seekers, shifting to recognized refugees, and potentially becoming irregular migrants or victims of trafficking as circumstances change. Because rigid legal categories often fail to capture this fluidity, justice systems must ground their approaches in universal human rights, which apply regardless of an individual's administrative status.
Judicial proceedings involving migrants must anchor themselves in core international principles, including:
• A non-derogable, customary international law protection preventing the return of individuals to countries where they face torture or irreparable harm.
• The directive that authorities must not criminalize or penalize trafficking victims for unlawful acts committed as a direct consequence of their exploitation.
• The guarantee that victims receive access to legal aid, healthcare, and shelter independent of their ability or willingness to cooperate with criminal investigations.
Intersecting Vulnerabilities and Barriers to Justice
Building upon the legal framework of IML, Alaa Kassim detailed how migrant women disproportionately experience the compounding risks of gender-based violence, human trafficking, and structural discrimination. These vulnerabilities manifest most acutely in sectors heavily populated by migrant women, specifically domestic care and agriculture.
In domestic work, where women constitute approximately 75% of the global workforce, labor occurs within private settings. This isolation severely restricts regulatory oversight and leaves workers highly dependent on their employers. When attempting to report abuse or seek legal remedies, migrant women encounter formidable barriers.
(1) Justice systems in destination countries frequently intertwine immigration enforcement with criminal or labor proceedings. This misconception strongly discourages victims from reporting exploitation, as they fear detention or deportation.
(2) Geographical isolation and language barriers leave newly arrived migrants with little to no information regarding their labor rights or available complaint procedures.
(3) In conflict, crisis, or forced displacement settings, the loss of documentation and the absence of specialized survivor response mechanisms further alienate women from legal recourse.
National Perspectives
Translating international protocols, such as the Palermo Convention, into effective domestic action requires robust national legislation and an equipped judiciary. Insights from Indonesia and Tanzania illustrate both the strategic progress made and the persistent operational challenges local courts face.
Indonesia
Hon. Dr. Ifa Sudewi outlined the realities in Indonesia, a primary source country. Economic pressures often drive women toward overseas employment facilitated by unauthorized recruitment networks. These deceptive practices frequently result in severe labor and sexual exploitation upon arrival in destination countries.
To counter these threats, the Indonesian Supreme Court actively issues specific judicial guidelines. Notably, recent regulations mandate judges to rigorously assess applications for underage marriage, a mechanism traffickers frequently exploit to facilitate cross-border exploitation. The court also prioritizes capacity-building, conducting periodic training for judges to handle transnational evidence, secure victim restitution, and eliminate victim-blaming paradigms during adjudication.
Tanzania
Hon. Jacqueline Joas Rugemalila shared experiences from Tanzania, a country functioning as both a source and transit point for migrants. Tanzania enforces the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2008, a stringent legal framework carrying maximum penalties of 20 years imprisonment.
Magistrate Rugemalila highlighted the critical procedural safeguards implemented within Tanzanian courtrooms. Courts conduct proceedings in camera (privately) and utilize video testimony to protect victim confidentiality and prevent re-traumatization. Despite these legal
provisions, significant issues remain. Law enforcement officials occasionally conflate human trafficking with migrant smuggling, leading to misapplied justice. Additionally, severe resource constraints hinder the development of government-owned victim shelters and robust national databases, underscoring the urgent need for enhanced cross-border coordination.
Implementing a Victim-Centered Judicial Approach
Protecting migrant women requires adapting courtroom procedures to prioritize safety and trauma recovery. Eulàlia Figueras emphasized that judges must guarantee privacy during hearings, minimize unnecessary interviews, and prevent direct confrontation between victims and traffickers. Utilizing closed hearings and video conferencing successfully protects witness anonymity and prevents re-traumatization.
Furthermore, judicial actors, caseworkers, and court interpreters require specialized training in trauma, gender, and child-sensitive interview techniques. Legal outcomes frequently depend on the careful handling of victim testimony. Magistrate Rugemalila highlighted specific cases in Tanzania where appellate courts overturned trafficking convictions due to improperly recorded police statements or unsworn child testimony. These examples demonstrate exactly why legal professionals must process transnational evidence with extreme technical care.
States also hold a responsibility to grant temporary residence permits, humanitarian visas, or formal reflection periods. These administrative measures give survivors the stability required to participate fully in legal proceedings without fearing immediate deportation.
Regional and International Human Rights Systems
While national courts serve as the primary venue for justice, domestic remedies occasionally fail, become exhausted, or remain completely unavailable. In these situations, regional and international human rights systems provide crucial complementary protection for migrant women.
Figueras pointed out that international bodies—such as the UN treaty bodies and special rapporteurs—alongside regional courts like the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights, the European Court of Human Rights, and the Inter-American system, regularly address severe migration abuses. These institutions establish progressive jurisprudence. They hold governments directly accountable for illegal practices, such as collective expulsions, and enforce compliance with non-derogable human rights principles. Engaging these international mechanisms strengthens overall legal standards and offers an alternative avenue for justice when national frameworks prove insufficient.
Conclusion
Securing justice for migrant women demands immediate and resolute action from the global judicial community. Judges hold the most critical role in the application of international migration law. They possess the direct authority to stop severe exploitation by enforcing strict, trauma-informed courtroom procedures and requiring robust cross-border cooperation among states. A courtroom must function as the definitive guarantor of fundamental human rights for those facing abuse. Enforcing these international standards extends beyond basic statutory obligations. Upholding these laws serves as a concrete, essential commitment to protecting human dignity across all borders.