Headlines

IBERO-AMERICA: Summit Makes No Commitment to Legal Status for Migrants

Diana Cariboni*

MONTEVIDEO, Nov 5 2006 (IPS) - The final statement of the 16th Ibero-American summit, signed this weekend, includes no commitment to regularising the status of undocumented migrant workers.
At odds in the negotiations were the European approach, which seeks involvement by the countries of origin in controlling the flow of people, and the Latin American stance, which puts an accent on the human rights of migrants.

The final statement signed by the leaders meeting this weekend in the 16th Ibero-American summit, the “Montevideo Commitment”, includes no commitment to regularising the status of undocumented migrant workers.

The document, to which IPS had access, was negotiated by the foreign ministers of the 22 Ibero-American countries – Andorra, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, Paraguay, Portugal, Spain, Uruguay and Venezuela.

The theme of this year’s Ibero-American summit is migration and development. However, the final document signed on Saturday does not call for the effective implementation of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, but merely urges the signatory nations to “take it into account.”

Two positions are being debated in the summit in Uruguay: the European approach, which seeks to regulate international migration flows by involving the countries of origin in the task of controlling the phenomenon; and the Latin American stance, which puts an accent on the human rights of migrants and their families and avoids confusing the phenomenon with questions like domestic and international security, terrorism and drug trafficking.

The “Montevideo Commitment” urges states to consider signing, ratifying or adhering to United Nations conventions against transnational organised crime and people smuggling and trafficking, and to bring national laws into line with the international conventions.

But it merely expresses a willingness to continue the dialogue on how to establish standards for the protection of all migrant workers and their families, “taking into account” international instruments on the question.

The international convention on the issue states that “Migrant workers and members of their families shall be free to leave any state, including their state of origin.” It also establishes that migrant workers are entitled to all of the legal and labour guarantees and benefits that are in effect in the country where they live and work.

The convention, in force since 2003, has been ratified by only 34 states. Neither Spain – the second-largest recipient of Latin American migrants after the United States – nor Portugal has even signed the document.

Of the Latin American countries that draw large numbers of immigrants from the rest of the region, only Chile has signed and ratified the convention. Argentina and Brazil, for example, have not.

The rest of the Ibero-American parties to the convention are Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru and Uruguay.

The “Montevideo Commitment” states that migrating is not a crime, which means that countries should not establish policies oriented towards treating immigrants as criminals. It also establishes the need for “bilateral and multilateral coordination” to prevent and combat trafficking in persons and people smuggling.

During negotiation of the final document, differences emerged with respect to how much space to dedicate to recognition of the human rights of migrants and to the need to control and regulate migration flows.

The declaration underlines the need for “effective cooperation” on migration matters, especially in terms of the ties between migration and development, the orderly management of migration flows, and the promotion and protection of human rights.

The document also proposes the organisation of a forum on migration and development in 2008, and directs the Ibero-American General Secretariat to produce a study on migration, with contributions from regional bodies and organisations, and another on the social and economic impacts that immigrants have on recipient countries.

In another statement, the leaders said the construction of walls and fences was incompatible with friendly relations between states, based on cooperation.

The communique expressed profound concern over the U.S. government’s decision to build a fence along its border with Mexico, which the leaders described as a unilateral measure that runs counter to the spirit of understanding that should characterise attempts at problem-solving between neighbours.

Ceuta and Melilla, two Spanish enclaves in Morocco, are surrounded by double fences similar to the one being built along the U.S.-Mexican border, which have proven ineffective in stanching the flow of African migrants determined to make it into Europe.

In what appeared to be an attempt to avert criticism, Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero told the press in Montevideo that he can absolutely vouch for the decent treatment received by foreigners in his country.

Spain offers immigrants the treatment and consideration they are due as human beings, within the framework of the laws that apply to everyone, he said.

Last year, Spain granted legal status to 600,000 immigrants.

“Spain cannot be compared to the United States,” Ecuadorian sociologist Fredy Rivera, a professor at the Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences (FLACSO), told IPS after taking part in an international forum on “the hidden face of migration: 21st century slavery?” in Montevideo Monday.

“The problem that Latin American migrants have is with the United States, not Spain,” he said. “The treatment that Spaniards give to immigrants is very different. They provide them with medical attention and shelter, and they protect minors.”

* With additional reporting by Marcelo Jelen.