Refugee protection and responsibility sharing in Latin America: solidarity programmes and the Mexico Plan of Action

Abstract

The aim of this article is to analyse the three solidarity programmes in the Mexico Plan of Action (MPA) – the responsibility sharing programme for regional resettlement, the integration of refugees into safe communities, and the development of border regions. The MPA is a step forward in strengthening the protection of human rights and the affirmation of the universality of human dignity. The MPA's objectives and programmes promote responsibility both at the regional level, through the notions of international solidarity and shared responsibility, and at the international level, as cooperation at a regional level could encourage similar initiatives in other regions.

Keywords:

• refugee law
• responsibility sharing
• Latin America
• Mexico Plan of Action
• refugees

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Professor Susan Kneebone for generously sharing her time and expertise. I am enormously thankful for this support and opportunity. I also would like to thank Janelle Kenny for her rigorous academic editing.

Funding

This work was supported by the CAPES Foundation, Ministry of Education of Brazil, under Grant [number BEX 0796/14-0].

Notes on contributor

Stefania Eugenia Barichello is a doctoral candidate at the School of Advanced Study, University of London and a doctoral affiliate at the Refugee Law Initiative, University of London. Her research focuses on refugee protection and responsibility sharing in Latin America.

Notes

1. The expression Latin America will be used as defined by the United Nations Statistical Division, that is: Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panamá, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Uruguay and Venezuela. See: Liliana Lyra Jubilut, ‘Fora and Programmes for Refugees in Latin America’, in Regional Approaches to the Protection of Asylum Seekers: an International Legal Perspective, ed. Ademola Abass and Francesca Ippolito (Surrey: Ashgate, 2014), 245.

2. Although the complex concept of political asylum in Latin America is not the main object of this article, it seems important to briefly accentuate the differences between political asylum and refugee status as per the 1951 Refugee Convention. Political asylum is primarily a political measure in order to provide protection to individuals who are persecuted for political crimes, or common crimes committed for political reasons. On the other hand, ‘refuge’ is arguably a humanitarian measure for those who have ‘a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership of a particular social group’. The regional development of political asylum in the American continent occurred due to the internal political conflicts and to the instability of governments in the region. This distinction between concepts and systems occurs only in Latin America, while for the rest of the world the terms ‘asylum’ and ‘asylum seeker’ are used to identify the status of a refugee, not a ‘political asylee’. See Liliana Lyra Jubilut, O Direito Internacional dos Refugiados e sua Aplicação no Ordenamento Jurídico Brasileiro (São Paulo: Método, 2007), 37; Flavia Piovesan, ‘O direito de asilo e a proteção internacional dos refugiados', in O direito internacional dos refugiados: uma perspectiva brasileira, ed. Nádia Araújo and Guilherme Assis de Almeida (Rio de Janeiro; São Paulo: Renovar, 2001), 27; and Stefania Eugenia Barichello, ‘A evolução dos instrumentos de proteção do Direito Internacional dos Refugiados na América Latina’, Universitas: Relações Internacionais 10, Brasília, no. 1 (2012), 33. See also the following English-language sources: José H. Fischel de Andrade, ‘Regional Policy Approaches and Harmonisation: A Latin American Perspective', International Journal of Refugee Law 10, no. 3 (1998): 389, at 398–99; and Liliana Lyra Jubilut, ‘Fora and Programmes for Refugees in Latin America’, in Regional Approaches to the Protection of Asylum Seekers: an International Legal Perspective, ed. Ademola Abass and Francesca Ippolito (Surrey: Ashgate, 2014).

3. Regional Refugee Instruments & Related, Cartagena Declaration on Refugees, Colloquium on the International Protection of Refugees in Central America, Mexico and Panama, 22 November 1984, http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b36ec.html.

4. Article 1 of the convention as amended by the 1967 Protocol provides the definition of a refugee as: ‘A person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.' See: UN General Assembly, Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1951) 189 UNTS 137. Opened for Signature 28 July 1951. Entered into Force 22 April 1954.

5. Regional Refugee Instruments & Related, Mexico Declaration and Plan of Action to Strengthen International Protection of Refugees in Latin America, 16 November 2004, http://www.refworld.org/docid/424bf6914.html.

6. This is a concept that I will return to throughout this article. The armed socio-political conflict that Colombia has been going through for more than 40 years has become a permanent worry for human rights organisations, mainly because of widespread violence and mass violations of human rights perpetrated by networks of both guerrilla and parliamentary groups. Colombia is a typical example of the ‘crowded borders phenomenon’, because of the flow of asylum seekers and also internally displaced persons fleeing from violence crossing Colombia's borders in search of international protection in Venezuela, Panamá, Ecuador, and other States of the region. See: UNHCR, Hacia una visión compartida de las víctimas del conflicto colombiano en los países vecinos (Caracas: ACNUR, 2003); A. Rangel, ‘Colômbia: um país de contrastes’ Revista Diplomacia, Estratégia e Política 8 (2007).

7. Liliana Lyra Jubilut, ‘Fora and Programmes for Refugees in Latin America’, in Regional Approaches to the Protection of Asylum Seekers: An International Legal Perspective, ed. Ademola Abass and Francesca Ippolito (Surrey: Ashgate, 2014), 260.

8. Mexico Declaration and Plan of Action to Strengthen International Protection of Refugees in Latin America, Chapter Three.

9. See Philippe Lavanchy, ‘The Mexico Declaration and Plan of Action: Reaffirming Latin America's Generous Tradition of Asylum and Innovative Solutions’, International Journal of Refugee Law 3, no. 2 (2006): 450; William Spindler, ‘The Mexico Plan of Action: Protecting Refugees Through International Solidarity’, Forced Migration Review 24 (2005): 64; Tristan Harley, ‘Regional Cooperation and Refugee Protection in Latin America: A “South-South” Approach’, International Journal of Refugee Law 26, no. 1 (2014): 22.

10. See Liliana Lyra Jubilut and Wellington Carneiro, ‘Resettlement in Solidarity. A New Regional Approach towards a More Humane Durable Solution’, Refugee Survey Quarterly 30, no. 1 (2011): 63; Fabio Varoli, ‘Cities of Solidarity: Local Integration in Latin America’, Forced Migration Review 34 (2010): 44; Carolina Moulin, ‘Borders of Solidarity: Life in Displacement in the Amazon Tri-Border Region’, Refuge 26, no. 2 (2009): 41; Ana Guglielmelli White, ‘A Pillar of Protection: Solidarity Resettlement for Refugees in Latin America’, UNHCR New Issues in Refugee Research 239 (2012): 1.

11. See Eiko Thielemann, Richard Williams, and Christina Boswell, What System of Burden-sharing between Member States for the Reception of Asylum Seekers? (Brussels: European Parliament – Policy Department Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs, 2010); Eiko Thielemann, ‘Editorial Introduction’, Journal of Refugee Studies 16, no. 1 (2003): 225; and Gregor Noll Negotiating Asylum. The EU Aquis, Extraterritorial Protection and the Common Market of Deflection (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2000).

12. Susan Kneebone and Felicity Rawlings-Sanae, ‘Introduction’, in New regionalism and Asylum Seekers: Challenges Ahead, ed. Susan Kneebone and Felicity Rawlings-Sanae (Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2007), 1.

13. Asha Hans and Astri Suhrke, ‘Responsibility Sharing', in Reconceiving International Refugee Law, ed. James C. Hathaway (The Hague, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1997), 83.

14. Kneebone and Rawlings-Sanae, ‘Introduction', 1.

15. Ibid.

16. Ibid.

17. José H. Fischel de Andrade, ‘Regional Policy Approaches and Harmonisation: A Latin American Perspective', International Journal of Refugee Law 10, no. 3 (1998): 389, at 391.

18. Hans and Suhrke, ‘Responsibility Sharing', 108.

19. Bill Frelick. ‘Afterword: Assessing the Prospects for Reform of International Refugee Law’, in Reconceiving International Refugee Law, ed. James C. Hathaway (The Hague, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1997), 147.

20. Peter H. Schuck, ‘Refugee Burden-Sharing: A Modest Proposal', Yale Journal of International Law 22 (1997): 243, at 249.

21. Frelick, ‘Afterword: Assessing the Prospects', 152.

22. Susan Kneebone, ‘Conclusions; Challenges Ahead’, in New Regionalism and Asylum Seekers: Challenges Ahead, ed. Susan Kneebone and Felicity Rawlings-Sanae (Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2007), 221, at 229.

23. Ibid.

24. Ibid.

25. Kneebone and Rawlings-Sanae, ‘Introduction', 1.

26. Jean-Pierre L. Fonteyne, ‘Burden-Sharing: An Analysis of the Nature and Function of International Solidarity in Cases of Mass Influx of Refugees’, Australian Year Book of International Law 8 (1978–80): 162, at 166–7.

27. Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.

28. James C. Hathaway and R. Alexander Neve, ‘Making International Refugee Law Relevant Again: A Proposal for Collectivized and Solution-Oriented Protection’, Harvard Human Rights Journal 10 (1997): 115, at 169.

29. Ibid.

30. Thielemann, ‘Editorial Introduction', 225.

31. Hathaway and Neve, ‘Making International Refugee Law Relevant Again', 144.

32. See Thielemann et al., ‘What System of Burden-sharing’.

33. Jubilut and Carneiro, ‘Resettlement in Solidarity', 70.

34. Thielemann et al., ‘What System of Burden-sharing’, 111.

35. Tristan Harley ‘Regional Cooperation and Refugee Protection in Latin America: A “South-South” Approach’, International Journal of Refugee Law 26, no. 1 (2014): 22.

36. UNHCR, ‘Burden Sharing: Discussion Paper Submitted by UNHCR’, in Fifth Annual Plenary Meeting of the Intergovernmental Asia-Pacific Consultations on Refugees, Displaced Persons and Migrants (APC), 2001, http://www.apcprocess.net/Inter-active/past%20apc%20papers/burden_sharingUNHCR.htm.

37. Hathaway and Neve, ‘Making International Refugee Law Relevant Again', 145.

38. Ibid.

39. Noll, Negotiating Asylum, 270.

40. UNHCR, ‘Burden Sharing’.

41. Thielemann, ‘Editorial Introduction', 225.

42. Ibid.

43. Noll, Negotiating Asylum, 272.

44. Jubilut, ‘Fora and Programmes for Refugees in Latin America', 245.

45. Lavanchy, ‘The Mexico Declaration', 450.

46. Flavia Piovesan and Liliana Lyra Jubilut, ‘Regional Developments: Americas’, in The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugee and its Protocol. A Commentary, ed. Andreas Zimmermann (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 205; and Jubilut, ‘Fora and Programmes for Refugees in Latin America', 261.

47. See: Lavanchy, ‘The Mexico Declaration', 450; Harley, ‘Regional Cooperation', 22.

48. The exceptions are Cuba and Guyana, which are not party to either treaty. See: Jubilut, ‘Fora and Programmes for Refugees in Latin America', 245.

49. Fischel de Andrade, ‘Regional Policy Approaches', 389.

50. Jubilut, ‘Fora and Programmes for Refugees in Latin America', 255, 263.

51. Piovesan and Jubilut, ‘Regional Developments: Americas', 205.

52. Cartagena Declaration on Refugees, Colloquium on the International Protection of Refugees in Central America, Mexico and Panama (1984), http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b36ec.html.

53. Jubilut and Carneiro, ‘Resettlement in Solidarity', 66–7.

54. Kneebone and Rawlings-Sanae, ‘Introduction', 8.

55. Jubilut, ‘Fora and Programmes for Refugees in Latin America', 253.

56. Kneebone and Rawlings-Sanae, ‘Introduction', 8.

57. Ibid., 9; and Jubilut, ‘Fora and Programmes for Refugees in Latin America', 255.

58. Ibid.

59. Jubilut, ‘Fora and Programmes for Refugees in Latin America', 263.

60. Fischel de Andrade, ‘Regional Policy Approaches', 401.

61. UNHCR. The Mexico Plan of Action to Strengthen International Protection of Refugees in Latin America. Main Achievements and Challenges During the Period 2005–2010 (2010), http://www.pamacnur2010.com/MPAprogressEnglish.pdf.

62. Ibid.

63. San Jose Declaration on Refugees and Displaced Persons (1994), http://www.refworld.org/docid/4a54bc3fd.html.

64. Ibid., Preamble.

65. Mexico Declaration and Plan of Action to Strengthen International Protection of Refugees in Latin America, 16 November 2004, http://www.refworld.org/docid/424bf6914.html.

66. Guglielmelli White, ‘A Pillar of Protection', 3.

67. Lavanchy, ‘The Mexico Declaration', 451.

68. The chapter on Durable Solutions recognised voluntary repatriation as the best solution for refugees, however it did not anticipate the need to create a specific regional programme.

69. Jubilut, ‘Fora and Programmes for Refugees in Latin America', 260–1.

70. Ibid., 260.

71. Jubilut and Carneiro, ‘Resettlement in Solidarity', 70; Jubilut, ‘Fora and Programmes for Refugees in Latin America', 261; and Harley, ‘Regional Cooperation', 22.

72. Brasilia Declaration on the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons in the Americas, 11 November 2010, http://www.refworld.org/docid/4cdd44582.html.

73. Ibid.

74. Ibid.

75. Harley, ‘Regional Cooperation', 22.

76. Jubilut, ‘Fora and Programmes for Refugees in Latin America', 256.

77. Jubilut and Carneiro, ‘Resettlement in Solidarity', 68.

78. Ibid.

79. Ibid., 71.

80. Harley, ‘Regional Cooperation', 22.

81. Moulin, ‘Borders of Solidarity', 41.

82. Jubilut and Carneiro, ‘Resettlement in Solidarity', 74.

83. According to Moulin, ‘understandings of solidarity … speak to each of these perspectives – managerial, faith-based, and autonomous – stressing the problems and also the positive aspects that might be learned from approaching borders through the lenses of solidarity'. See: Moulin, ‘Borders of Solidarity', 41.

84. Guglielmelli White, ‘A Pillar of Protection', 5.

85. UNHCR, The Mexico Plan of Action to Strengthen International Protection of Refugees in Latin America.

86. Marcia A. Vera Espinoza ‘Mapping Refugee Resettlement in Latin America: Actors and Processes in Chile and Brazil', in SLAS 2014. 50th Anniversary Conference (London, 2014).

87. Ibid.

88. Jubilut and Carneiro, ‘Resettlement in Solidarity', 71.

89. Varoli, ‘Cities of Solidarity', 44.

90. Ibid.

91. Jubilut and Carneiro, ‘Resettlement in Solidarity', 63.

92. Piovesan and Jubilut, ‘Regional Developments: Americas', 224.