International migrants day
12/17/2013
Brazil is still not a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and their Families. On International Migrants Day, Conectas issued a warning: the delay in signing this important agreement threatens the security and human dignity of thousands of people who attempt to exercise their right to migrate. Since December 2010, the text of the Convention has been pending in the National Congress for ratification.
According to Pablo Ceriani Cernadas, from Argentina, who on January 1 will become the newest member of the UN Committee on Migrants, “of the 47 States Parties, 17 are from Latin America. Of these, 8 are South American. Venezuela and Brazil are the region’s only two non-signatory states. I think there are two reasons for this. The first is that the topic of migration was not on the table in Brazil, like it was in other countries in the region. The other countries acted, in large part, due to pressure from their own citizens who lived abroad during the times of exiles and dictatorships. The second reason is perhaps the fact that this topic was not a priority on the agenda of Brazilian civil society.”
Cernadas was coordinator of the Migration and Asylum Program at the Human Rights Center of the National University of Lanús, in Argentina, and a member of Cels (Center for Legal and Social Studies), also in Argentina. Below are the main excerpts of the interview:
One of the most acute problems of migration in Brazil today involves the entry of more than 20,000 Haitians and the creation of the “humanitarian visa”, which does not function like it should do. How can this situation be resolved?
The measures adopted in the field of migration need to be related to the real context of the country. I think that Brazil could issue “humanitarian residency” status instead of the “humanitarian visa”. The difference being that immigrants would receive residency right here in the country, not in the embassies overseas, which is currently the case with Haitians, and where the process seems to be more complicated. Argentina issues temporary residency status for humanitarian reasons, for example. After three years, people in this category receive a permanent visa. What needs to be done is this: convert the measures into law. This provides more backing that a simple visa, which always depends on certain conditions.
On the first day of 2014, you will become a member of the UN committee on migrants. How can you influence Brazil on issues like this?
Brazil is still not a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers and their Families. Because of this, there’s little I can do. If the country joins, it will start to issue reports. The same thing goes for Brazilian civil society. Based on this, we can make recommendations. The Convention proposes minimum guarantees, especially for undocumented migrants. They are not even particularly high standards, but minimum guarantees.
Why do you think that Brazil has not yet joined?
Of the 47 States Parties, 17 are from Latin America. Of these, 9 are South American. Venezuela and Brazil are the region’s only two non-signatory states. I think there are two reasons for this. The first is that the topic of migration was not on the table in Brazil, like it was in other countries in the region. The other countries acted, in large part, due to pressure from their own citizens who lived abroad during the times of exiles and dictatorships. The second reason is perhaps the fact that this topic was not a priority on the agenda of Brazilian civil society.
Our immigration law dates back to the dictatorship. What does this mean in practical terms?
That it is outdated and restrictive. But it is part of a regional context from another era, an era of dictatorships and Operation Condor. The mobility of people was seen as a threat to national security, so it was security-focused. Suffice to say that the law provides for prison sentences, criminalizing illegal immigration. It doesn’t matter that the law is not being applied; it still exists. Over the past 20 years, a new awareness of the phenomenon of migration has developed. Since the Brazilian law has not been brought up to date, it is naturally at odds with this recent development. Finally, it needs to be said that this law is outdated even in relation to the most recent commitments assumed by Brazil in the Mercosur trade bloc.
