Immigration policies that kill | Article

Ana Lorena Delgadillo*

Migrating without dying is quite a feat in Mexico, a feat that is becoming increasingly difficult to achieve. The presence of organized crime in collusion with the government determines the fate of migrants and asylum seekers. Impunity is its accomplice, but it also has another root. Four years ago, in June 2019, migrants became currency for Mexico and the United States of America (USA) when both countries signed the Joint Declaration. Mexico has pledged to deter, detain and deport migrants seeking to reach the United States and deploy 6,000 National Guard members. Today this figure has increased almost fivefold. He also promised to accept into Mexico those awaiting a decision on asylum proceedings in the United States. In exchange, the then-Trump administration would not raise tariffs.

The consequences were deadly, and although the policy was called “Remain in Mexico” or MPP at the time, the practice evolved into the current application of Section 8 and the Asylum Bar (asylum bar). A country with such levels of violence as Mexico should never have to accept this.

The Justice Fund filed an injunction against the Joint Declaration. Our questions are: How do we sign an agreement that subordinates our sovereignty to the United States and violates our Constitution and international treaties? How did you provide the army to deter migrants? Why did you unconditionally agree to put the lives and integrity of migrants at risk? Given the scope of the agreement and the historical counterweights of our system, it should have been viewed as an international treaty rather than a mere agreement.

At first instance, protection was denied, and the district court played a shameful role. In the appeal, the panel court saw its importance and relevance for the country, as well as an opportunity to consider for the first time the scope of the right to asylum in Mexico. He decided to send it to the Supreme Court of the Nation (SCJN), where it was accepted by the Second Chamber and submitted to Minister Yasmin Esquivel. It will be discussed on October 11.

The procedure for his speech was replete with violations. The published project is disgraceful. Absolute lack of legal technique and ignorance of our precedents, Constitution and international treaties.

It says unsustainable things: We have no legitimate interest in complaining about immigration policies, even though the First Chamber of the SCJN recently said “yes” in another statement of defense questioning the Remain in Mexico program promoted by the Women’s Institute of Mexico. Migration, IMUMI. He does not recognize that the Declaration is a de facto international treaty and, as such, had to be approved by the Senate. It does not recognize that killing immigration policies are a matter of protection, as the First Chamber did.

He said the Justice Fund has not proven that Mexico is an unsafe country for migrants; denies the connection between immigration policies and inhumane conditions in which migrants are detained. This is despite the recent deadly fire at an immigration ranch in Ciudad Juarez.

Violence against migrants is clear, but even so, US organizations filed amicus briefs warning of the serious abuses they document in this country. Two reports were presented (In the mouth of a wolf And Under the shoe), which demonstrate the deadly consequences of the agreement. He set a very high standard of proof for us. The authorities had a privilege because they exercised no control.

We urge other ministers in the Second Chamber of the ECEC not to approve such a project. It would be shameful, humiliating, insulting and pitiful for migrants.

Impunity is born and reaped in the prosecutor’s office, but it is also fueled by a lack of balance. We need this balance, we need the Court to protect migrants.

* Director of the Justice Foundation

Source: Aristegui Noticias

follow:
\