Vanessa’s deportation is proof of the inherent threats involved in Argentina’s immigration policy as modified by presidential decree. The decision to revert her expulsion is a step forward towards the restauration of children’s rights.
The Committee of the Convention on Migrant Workers (CMW) determined that the decree breaches international treaty ratified by Argentina in 2007.
The lawyer of Vanessa Gómez Cueva, Juan Martín Villanueva, along with Amnesty International, la Comisión Argentina para Refugiados y Migrantes (CAREF), the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) and CELS, requested a precautionary measure so that she and her small child can reunite with their family.
A group of organizations submitted information to the IACHR on the migration policies of the provincial governments of Jujuy and Chubut. We also provided details regarding a series of expulsions of migrants.
The judges determined that the Decree of Necessity and Urgency (DNU) adopted by the national government to modify the country’s Migration Law is unconstitutional because it does not comply with the requirements for this kind of decree and because the changes go against migrants’ rights.
Today marks one year since the national government modified via emergency decree the country’s Migration Law, a product of years of collective struggle for democratic migration legislation. The result is a policy of selectivity that puts people under permanent suspicion.
The government rejected the accreditations of 65 people who planned to participate in the WTO Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires and sent the list to immigration officials as a security “alert.” Two people on the list were ultimately deported.
On Monday, December 4, the 2017 Annual Report edited by Siglo XXI will become available. The prologue, which we are sharing in advance, calls attention to decisions, measures and events that adversely affect critical items on the human rights agenda as well as protection mechanisms. The government response to grave incidents, repeated incidents of repression and discourses about present-day threats and episodes from the past put the human rights consensuses achieved in Argentina on alert. These have been compounded by judicial decisions that take aim at some of the pillars of democracy. This situation requires safeguarding human rights principles from the dynamic of overall polarization.
The Decree of Necessity and Urgency (DNU) on migrants associates migration with crime, basing its assessment on partial, decontextualized data. This promotes xenophobia and stigmatizes migrants.
More than 150 organizations requested an urgent meeting with Argentine Cabinet Chief Marcos Peña, in order to propose to him that any modification to the Migrations Law must be debated in the multiple spaces that exist for this purpose, from working groups all the way to Congress.
The draft Decree of Necessity and Urgency (DNU) that we gained access to changes the paradigm of the current law and is a setback for migrant rights.