liberty of tourist movements

UN Tourism | Bringing the world closer

Ethics, culture and social responsibility, global code of ethics for tourism.

• Accessible Tourism
• Tourism and Culture
• Women’s Empowerment and Tourism

share this content

• Share this article on facebook
• Share this article on twitter
• Share this article on linkedin

" Tourism is a genuine driver of solidarity and development. Let us all fully harness its power to bring people and communities together, abiding by the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism. This way tourism can keep delivering better opportunities and sustainable development for millions across the globe. "

Zurab pololikashvili, un tourism secretary-general, august 2020.

As a fundamental frame of reference for responsible and sustainable tourism, the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism (GCET) is a comprehensive set of principles designed to guide key-players in tourism development. Addressed to governments, the travel industry, communities and tourists alike, it aims to help maximise the sector’s benefits while minimising its potentially negative impact on the environment, cultural heritage and societies across the globe. Adopted in 1999 by the General Assembly of the World Tourism Organization, its acknowledgement by the United Nations two years later expressly encouraged UN Tourism to promote the effective follow-up of its provisions. Although not legally binding, the Code features a voluntary implementation mechanism through its recognition of the role of the World Committee on Tourism Ethics (WCTE), to which stakeholders may refer matters concerning the application and interpretation of the document.

The Code’s 10 articles amply cover the economic, social, cultural and environmental components of travel and tourism:

Tourism's contribution to mutual understanding and respect between peoples and societies

3. The host communities, on the one hand, and local professionals, on the other, should acquaint themselves with and respect the tourists who visit them and find out about their lifestyles, tastes and expectations; the education and training imparted to professionals contribute to a hospitable welcome; 4. It is the task of the public authorities to provide protection for tourists and visitors and their belongings; they must pay particular attention to the safety of foreign tourists owing to the particular vulnerability they may have; they should facilitate the introduction of specific means of information, prevention, security, insurance and assistance consistent with their needs; any attacks, assaults, kidnappings or threats against tourists or workers in the tourism industry, as well as the wilful destruction of tourism facilities or of elements of cultural or natural heritage should be severely condemned and punished in accordance with their respective national laws; 5. When travelling, tourists and visitors should not commit any criminal act or any act considered criminal by the laws of the country visited and abstain from any conduct felt to be offensive or injurious by the local populations, or likely to damage the local environment; they should refrain from all trafficking in illicit drugs, arms, antiques, protected species and products and substances that are dangerous or prohibited by national regulations; 6. Tourists and visitors have the responsibility to acquaint themselves, even before their departure, with the characteristics of the countries they are preparing to visit; they must be aware of the health and security risks inherent in any travel outside their usual environment and behave in such a way as to minimize those risks.

Tourism as a vehicle for individual and collective fulfilment

Tourism, a factor of sustainable development

Tourism, a user of the cultural heritage of mankind and contributor to its enhancement

Tourism, a beneficial activity for host countries and communities

Obligations of stakeholders in tourism development

Right to tourism

Liberty of tourist movements

Rights of the workers and entrepreneurs in the tourism industry

Implementation of the principles of the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism

Full Text of the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism

• ENGLISH (brochure)
• ENGLISH (passport size)
• FRENCH (brochure)
• FRENCH (passport size)
• SPANISH (brochure)
• SPANISH (passport size)
• RUSSIAN (brochure)
• RUSSIAN (passport size)
• ARABIC (brochure)
• ARABIC (passport size)

The versions of the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism in non-official languages of the World Tourism Organization have been endorsed by official National Tourism Administrations of the countries and regions listed below. UN Tourism does not guarantee the accuracy of these translations with regard to those in the official languages of the Organization.

This site shall constitute the main source for the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism. Other sites onto which the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism has been uploaded are not under the control of UN Tourism. UN Tourism shall not be responsible for the content of any of these sites or any link contained therein. 

The Global Code of Ethics for Tourism in non-official languages

• ALBANIA (Albanian)
• ANDORRA (Catalán)
• AZERBAIJAN (Azerbaijani)
• BANGLADESH (Bangladeshi)
• BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA ( Bosnian ) ( Serbian ) ( Croatian )
• BRAZIL (Portuguese)
• BULGARIA (Bulgarian)
• CHINA (Chinese)
• CROATIA (Croatian)
• CZECH REPUBLIC (Czech)
• EGYPT (Arabic)
• FLEMISH COMMUNITY OF BELGIUM (Dutch )
• GEORGIA (Georgian)
• GERMANY (German)
• GREECE (Greek)
• HUNGARY (Hungarian)
• ICELAND (Icelandic)
• INDONESIA (Bahasa)
• ISRAEL (Hebrew)
• ITALY (Italian)
• JAPAN (Japanese)
• JORDAN (Arabic)
• LATVIA (Latvian)
• LITHUANA (Lithuanian)
• NIGERIA ( Hausa ) ( Yoruba )
• PALESTINE (Arabic)
• PHILIPPINES (Filipino)
• POLAND (Polish)
• PORTUGAL (Portuguese)
• REPUBLIC OF KOREA (Korean)
• ROMANIA (Romanian)
• SAN MARINO (Italian)
• SERBIA (Serbian)
• SLOVAKIA (Slovak)
• SLOVENIA (Slovenian)
• THAILAND (Thai)
• TURKEY (Turkish)
• UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA (Swahili)

Private Sector Signatories of the Commitment

In 2011, UN Tourism formulated a Private Sector Commitment to the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism, for the signature of private enterprises worldwide. In signing the commitment, companies pledge to uphold, promote and implement the values of responsible and sustainable tourism development championed by the Code. They further undertake to report on their implementation of the Code's principles in their corporate governance to the World Committee on Tourism Ethics.

Ethics convention

The UN Tourism Convention on Tourism Ethics, the first convention of the Organization, was approved by A/RES/722(XXIII) during the 23rd General Assembly which took place in San Petersburg, Russian Federation in September 2019.

World Committee on Tourism Ethics (WCTE)

Established in 2003, the World Committee on Tourism Ethics is the impartial body responsible for interpreting, applying and evaluating the provisions of the UN Tourism Global Code of Ethics for Tourism. For further information, please see UN Tourism General Assembly Resolution A/RES/607(XIX) of October 2011.

The Responsible Tourist

To facilitate the understanding of the principles of the  Global Code of Ethics for Tourism  by tourists, the  World Committee on Tourism Ethics prepared the " Tips for a Responsible Traveller " (2020 version)  to highlight those principles of the Code directly related to tourists, in order to help guide travellers in making their behaviour ever more responsible. 

Background of the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism

The Global Code of Ethics for Tourism sets a frame of reference for the responsible and sustainable development of world tourism. It draws inspiration from many similar declarations and industry codes that have come before and it adds new thinking that reflects our changing society at the beginning of the 21st century.

Related links

• UN Tourism ETHICS AWARD
• RESOLUTIONS ON THE GLOBAL CODE OF ETHICS FOR TOURISM
• Implementation Reports on the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism
• 20th Anniversary of the Global Code of Ethics in Tourism

Search This Blog

Project jurisprudence, the right to travel is not absolute.

Section 6. The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. Neither shall the right to travel be impaired except in the interest of national security, public safety or public health, as maybe provided by law.

Article III, Section 6 of the 1987 Constitution should be interpreted to mean that while the liberty of travel may be impaired even without Court Order, the appropriate executive officers or administrative authorities are not armed with arbitrary discretion to impose limitations. They can impose limits only on the basis of "national security, public safety, or public health" and "as may be provided by law," a limitive phrase which did not appear in the 1973 text (The Constitution, Bernas, Joaquin G., S.J., Vol. I, First Edition, 1987, p. 263). Apparently, the phraseology in the 1987 Constitution was a reaction to the ban on international travel imposed under the previous regime when there was a Travel Processing Center, which issued certificates of eligibility to travel upon application of an interested party.[5]

On Section 5, in the explanation on page 6 of the annotated provisions, it says that the phrase "and changing the same" is taken from the 1935 version; that is, changing the abode. The addition of the phrase WITHIN THE LIMITS PRESCRIBED BY LAW ensures that, whether the rights be impaired on order of a court or without the order of a court, the impairment must be in accordance with the prescriptions of law; that is, it is not left to the discretion of any public officer.[8]

Section 5, 1973 Constitution: The  liberty of abode and of travel  shall not, be impaired except upon lawful order of the court, or when necessary in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health. (Emphasis ours)

MR. NOLLEDO. x x x x My next question is with respect to Section 5, lines 8 to 12 of page 2. It says here that the liberty of abode shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court or - underscoring the word "or" - when necessary in the interest of national security, public safety or public health. So, in the first part, there is the word "court"; in the second part, it seems that the question rises as to who determines whether it is in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health. May it be determined merely by administrative authorities? FR. BERNAS. The understanding we have of this is that, yes, it may be determined by administrative authorities provided that they act, according to line 9,  within the limits prescribed by law . For instance when this thing came up; what was in mind were passport officers. If they want to deny a passport on the first instance, do they have to go to court? The position is, they may deny a passport provided that the denial is based on the limits prescribed by law. The phrase " within the limits prescribed by law " is something which is added here. That did not exist in the old provision.[10]

MR. TADEO. Mr. Presiding Officer, anterior amendment on Section 5, page 2, line 11. Iminumungkahi kong alisin iyong mga salitang nagmumula sa "or" upang maiwasan natin ang walang pakundangang paglabag sa liberty of abode sa ngalan ng national security at pagsasagawa ng "hamletting" ng kung sinu-sino na lamang. Kapag inalis ito, maisasagawa lamang ang "hamletting" upon lawful order of the court. x x x. x x x x MR. RODRIGO. Aside from that, this includes the right to travel? FR. BERNAS. Yes. MR. RODRIGO. And there are cases when passports may not be granted or passports already granted may be cancelled. If the amendment is approved, then passports may not be cancelled unless it is ordered by the court. Is that the intention? x x x x FR. BERNAS. Yes MR. RODRIGO. But another right is involved here and that is to travel. SUSPENSION OF SESSION FR. BERNAS. Mr. Presiding Officer, may I request a suspension so that we can separate the liberty of abode and or changing the same from the right to travel, because they may necessitate different provisions. THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Bengzon). The session is suspended. x x x x RESUMPTION OF SESSION x x x x THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Bengzon). Commissioner Bernas is recognized The session is resumed. FR. BERNAS. The proposal is amended to read: The liberty of abode and of changing the same within the limits prescribed by law, shall not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court. NEITHER SHALL THE RIGHT TO TRAVEL BE IMPAIRED EXCEPT IN THE INTEREST OF NATIONAL SECURITY, PUBLIC SAFETY, OR PUBLIC HEALTH AS MAYBE PROVIDED BY LAW. THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Bengzon). The Committee has accepted the amendment, as amended. Is there any objection? (Silence) The Chair hears none; the amendment, as amended, is approved.[11]

Some of these statutory limitations [to the right to travel] are the following: 1] The Human Security Act of 2010 or [R.A.] No. 9372. The law restricts the right to travel of an individual charged with the crime of terrorism even though such person is out on bail. 2] The Philippine Passport Act of 1996 or R.A. No. 8239. Pursuant to said law, the Secretary of Foreign Affairs or his authorized consular officer may refuse the issuance of, restrict the use of, or withdraw, a passport of a Filipino citizen. 3] The "Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003" or R.A. No. 9208. Pursuant to the provisions thereof, the [Bureau of Immigration], in order to manage migration and curb trafficking in persons, issued Memorandum Order Radir No. 2011-011, allowing its Travel Control and Enforcement Unit to "offload passengers with fraudulent travel documents, doubtful purpose of travel, including possible victims of human trafficking" from our ports. 4] The Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 or R. A. No. 8042, as amended by R.A. No. 10022. In enforcement of said law, the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) may refuse to issue deployment permit to a specific country that effectively prevents our migrant workers to enter such country. 5] The Act on Violence against Women and Children or R.A. No. 9262. The law restricts movement of an individual against whom the protection order is intended. 6] Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995 or R.A. No. 8043. Pursuant thereto, the Inter-Country Adoption Board may issue rules restrictive of an adoptee's right to travel "to protect the Filipino child from abuse, exploitation, trafficking and/or sale or any other practice in connection with adoption which is harmful, detrimental, or prejudicial to the child."[14]