COMMITTEE ON PROTECTION OF MIGRANTS CONSIDERS INITIAL REPORT OF MEXICO

The Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families has considered the initial report of Mexico on its implementation of the provisions of the International Convention on the Protection of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.

Presenting the report, María del Refugio González, Undersecretary for Multilateral Affairs and Human Rights of the Ministry of Foreign Relations of Mexico, said that the changes in the international sphere in the recent past demonstrated that this was indeed the century of migration. For that reason, States had to design and develop migration policies. Mexico had worked to harmonize its national policy with international human rights standards of the international community, and had fostered greater participation by civil society in the debate on the best methods to promote and protect human rights; it had taken full advantage of international cooperation to that end. As part of the protection of human rights of migrant workers, Mexico had fostered a new culture of labour, which promoted work as part of the full expression of human dignity, as well as a means of finding a better life for the individual and the family.

Raul Cueto, Coordinator of International and Inter-Institutional Relations of the National Institute for Migration, continuing with the presentation of the report, said that Mexico had held national consultations with legislators, academics, civil society organizations and local authorities, to serve as a basis for Mexico’s national policy on both emigration from Mexico, as well as immigration to Mexico taking place on the southern border. Moreover, Mexico had already launched a number of programmes and policies to assist migrants and guarantee their rights, through bilateral and multilateral agreements to protect their rights, as well as a programme to train civil servants to deal with the issues surrounding migrants and to promote and protect their rights and to assure them access to justice.

In preliminary concluding remarks, Ana Elizabeth Cubias-Medina, the Committee Expert acting as country rapporteur for the report of Mexico, said the Committee welcomed Mexico’s efforts to adapt to its position as a country of origin, transit and immigration. There was still a need to update legislation. It was not enough to amend the General Population Act, and a Migration Act was needed which should ensure the human rights of undocumented migrants and transmigrants. The use of prisons as holding centres was totally reprehensible because it violated human rights, and attention should be paid to this matter. Also, all provisions which provided criminal punishment for illegal migrants should be abolished. Mexico was on the right path and was doing everything it could, but it should still address these urgent issues.

Prasad Kariyawasam, the Chairperson of the Committee, in his preliminary concluding remarks, thanked the delegation for the substantive and fulfilling dialogue. The Committee had learnt about the progress made and the challenges faced by Mexico. It appreciated the work of the Mexican authorities to protect the rights of Mexican workers abroad, and to ensure the rights of transmigrants. However, despite these efforts, the Committee still had concerns about the implementation of the rules on the ground. There were some loopholes in the legislative framework and that meant there was room for improvement. Migrant children and women continued to be particularly exposed to human rights violations, especially trafficking. These issues and the Government’s efforts to deal with them would be reflected in the Committee’s final observations and recommendations which would be issued on 3 November.

Other Committee Experts raised questions about issues concerning the situation of transmigrants, undocumented migrants transiting the country to reach the United States; the lack of specific legislation to criminalize trafficking in women and children which opened the way for violations of the rights of transmigrant women and children; issuing security approval certificates to migrants; protections afforded to irregular migrants in Mexico; and the powers of the National Human Rights Commission, among others.

The delegation of Mexico was also made up of representatives of the National Institute for Migration, the Ministry of Labour and Social Planning, the Ministry of Foreign Relations, and the Permanent Mission of Mexico to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

The Committee considered the report of Mexico over two meetings. It will issue its final conclusions and recommendations on the report at the end of its session, which concludes on 3 November.

The Committee will meet in public at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 1 November, to discuss working methods with regards to the presentation of reports, and efforts to promote the provisions of the Convention.

Report of Mexico

Migration is a multidimensional phenomenon for Mexico, in that it is a country of origin, transit and immigration. According to the initial report of Mexico (CMW/C/MEX/1), there are few migrants to Mexico, accounting for only 0.5 per cent of the country’s total population in 2000. A large majority of migrants come from the United States (69 per cent), followed by Central America (9 per cent) and South America (5.9 per cent). Most of Mexico’s emigrants go to the United States, primarily motivated by the search for employment opportunities. Among the principal characteristics of that migration is a trend towards mass migration of Mexicans to the United States, with the United States population of Mexican origin almost tripling between 1980 and 2003, from around 9 million to 26.7 million. Around 85 per cent of Mexican migrants in the United States have resided there for more than three years, and only one in five has been naturalized. Mexicans were the largest migrant group in the United States, and very diverse in terms of gender and age; contrary to the traditional pattern, Mexican migration to the United States increasingly involves whole families.

Regarding migration to Mexico, according to indirect assessments based on National Institute for Migration statistics, the flow of undocumented migrants over the southern border increased by 41.4 per cent in the period 2001-2004, from 144,300 cases to 204,000. To avoid an approach that treats undocumented migration as a crime, Mexico uses the term “secure” rather than “detain” in migration matters. Under the General Population Act, a foreigner is secured when, because of his/her irregular situation in the country, he/she is housed temporarily in a migrant holding centre, pending clarification of his/her migration status and, if appropriate, a decision to send him/her back. The latter is an administrative penalty, applicable when a foreigner infringes migration law, and involves making the foreigner leave the country immediately. Indicators show that the majority of irregular migrants are Guatemalans, followed by Hondurans and Salvadorans, and that most of them are headed for the United States. In all, 215,695 migrants were secured and 211,618 were sent back in 2004. Undocumented migration is growing at an annual rate of 30 per cent. The State does not have sufficient material and human resources to respond to irregular migration flows of this magnitude, and is working with civil society and with the countries concerned to tackle the phenomenon.

Presentation of Report

MARÍA DEL REFUGIO GONZÁLEZ, Undersecretary for Multilateral Affairs and Human Rights of the Ministry of Foreign Relations of Mexico, presenting the report, said that changes in the international sphere in the recent past demonstrated that this was indeed the century of migration. For that reason, States had to design and develop migration policies. No State could do that alone: multilateral cooperation and links between the international community had to be strengthened to successfully address migration, as had been underscored in the High Level Dialogue on Migration held last September.

Ms. del Refugio González said Mexico had worked to harmonize its national policy with international human rights standards of the international community, and had fostered greater participation by civil society in the debate on the best methods to promote and protect human rights; it had taken full advantage of international cooperation to that end. As part of the protection of human rights of migrant workers, Mexico had fostered a new culture of labour, which promoted work as part of the full expression of human dignity, as well as a means of finding a better life for the individual and the family. To that end, Mexico had reached agreements with Central American countries in order to attain better working conditions for migrants and had initiated actions so that labour justice mechanisms were more accessible to them, whatever their migrant status. As could be seen in the report, the Mexican Government had undertaken major efforts to implement its obligations under the International Convention on the Protection of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families through the development of relevant plans and programmes and policies.

RAUL CUETO, Coordinator of International and Inter-Institutional Relations of the National Institute for Migration, continuing with the presentation of the report, said that Mexico had held national consultations with legislators, academics, civil society organizations and local authorities, to serve as a basis for Mexico’s national policy on both emigration from Mexico, as well as immigration to Mexico taking place on the southern border. Moreover, Mexico had already launched a number of programmes and policies to assist migrants and guarantee their rights, through bilateral and multilateral agreements to protect their rights, as well as a programme to train civil servants to deal with the issues surrounding migrants and to promote and protect their rights and to assure them access to justice.

In the past four years alone, Mr. Cueto underscored, Mexico had permanently transferred the labour and talent of some 400,000 of its nationals a year. Today, it was estimated that out of 10.6 million Mexicans who had immigrated to the United States, some 6.2 million were not documented. The migration authorities, along with the Ministry of Foreign Relations, were working continuously to promote and protect the rights of Mexican migrants to the United States to guarantee them access to health care, social services, justice, and consular assistance. The 48 consular offices of Mexico in the United States represented the most extensive consular services in the world.

According to the last report from the United States immigration authorities, in 2005, 1,024,000 repatriations were effected, of which some 17 per cent were women and 4.2 per cent were minors. In the period from January to July 2006, 330,562 repatriations were effected, 15 per cent women, and 7.3 per cent minors.

As the Committee knew, Mexico also faced the challenge of the constant growth in transit migrants – undocumented migrants who transited through the country en route to the United States. Mr. Cueto drew attention to the fact that, in contrast to past practice, the authorities had improved their records on the migration trends of vulnerable groups, such as women and minors, and those issues were of concern to the Government. That had given rise to the decision to devote the majority of the human and financial resources of the Migration Institute to administering and attending to the migration flows from Central American countries, with a particular emphasis on women and minors. In 2004 and 2005 Mexico had signed repatriation agreements with Guatemala and El Salvador, with separate chapters on migrant women and unaccompanied children, and which were based on the fundamental principal of preserving family unity. On 5 May of this year, Mexico signed a similar regional agreement with Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala, which included similar protections for women and minors. From October 2005 to May 2006 79,562 migrant women were assisted and 113,347 human rights pamphlets had been distributed to migrant women.

To fulfil its obligations under the Protocol on the Prevention, Elimination and Prohibition of Trafficking in Persons, in Particular Women and Children, which entered into force in Mexico in 2003, Mexico had already established an inter-institutional and international network to that end. Recently, the National Institute for Migration had established facilities to allow victims of trafficking to remain legally in the country and made financial and legal resources available to them if they assisted in the prosecution of the traffickers.

In March 2006, President Fox had inaugurated the new Migration Station for the Twenty-first Century in Tapachula, Chiappas – the focal point of Central American migrants entering the country. The centre could accommodate 960 persons temporarily, and another 490 on an overnight basis, with separate facilities for men, women and minors. In addition, in the second week of November, the National Institute for Migration would be inaugurating a new headquarters, located on the border gateway of Talismán, Chiappas. That would allow for the installation of a comprehensive computerized system for migrant services, including the provision of temporary labour permits and repatriation procedures, Mr. Cueto observed.

Oral Questions Raised by Committee Experts

ANA ELIZABETH CUBIAS-MEDINA, Committee Expert acting as country rapporteur for the report of Mexico, said that it was a cause for satisfaction that civil society organizations, academics and non-governmental organizations had contributed to Mexico’s initial report. Also to be commended were efforts to combat trafficking in persons and the new emphasis on non-criminalization of migrants. The regularization of various migrant documentation processes was also to be lauded. Particularly welcome was the attention accorded to vulnerable migrant groups, such as minors and women. Finally, she welcomed the new agreements reached with regional Governments to assist in the repatriation process in cases of illegal immigration.

The situation of transmigrants, those undocumented migrants transiting the country to reach the United States, was one of the main concerns of the Committee, Ms. Cubias-Medina said. She wondered what was the status of the new migration law, given the wide array of proposals that had been put before the Mexican Congress today.

Reports had been received of numerous violations of the rights of transmigrant women and children, Ms. Cubias-Medina observed. The lack of specific legislation to criminalize trafficking in women and children was especially grave in that context. What was the Government doing to combat the theft, extortion and ill-treatment inflicted on those groups by the Mara gangs? Was there a programme to address this or some monitoring mechanism in place to record the phenomenon? The Committee had heard reports of private actors or even the armed forces detaining such persons. Finally, she was concerned about the situation of indigenous migrants.

The Chairperson noted that the Mexico was a federal republic, and asked what measures were taken to ensure that the respective States implemented the obligations of Mexico under the Convention and how was that implementation monitored. Also, what were the special provisions for the detention of migrants under 18.

Other Experts asked questions and made comments relating to, among other things, the recent phenomenon of issuing security approval certificates to migrants, which had become common practice in the region; whether there was an age limit for reunification of spouses and children, and whether they could work in the public sector; and what was the current status of efforts to withdraw reservations to the treaty.

Response by the Delegation

The delegation of Mexico, responding to oral questions put by Experts, noted that the migration law of Mexico was in a process of flux. It included the General Population Act, adopted in 1974, as well as two subsequent amendments, and the Convention. Eleven separate amendments to the General Population Act, which had been put forward by different political parties, were currently under review by Congress. Those amendments represented quite different views. However, it was recognized that the general legal framework had to be reformed, given recent migratory trends and in view of the obligations engendered by the Convention.

Mexico had entered into agreements with the United States, the delegation pointed out, which provided for differentiated treatment to be accorded to particularly vulnerable migrant groups, including women and children. As already mentioned, such agreements had also been reached with Central American countries.

Regarding the Mara gangs, the delegation said that this was a public security question for Mexico, and discussions had already been held with other countries on how to address these gangs. Mexico was sharing information with the United States and Central American countries, and they were working together to combat these gangs. More particularly, Mexico was working to prevent ill-treatment, abuse and corruption in the southern border area. A green paper on the subject had been presented, which contained a comprehensive policy for securing the southern border, and balanced security issues with human rights concerns.

On the issue of minor migrants, the delegation stressed that minors were never held together with adults, but were always accorded differentiated treatment and separate accommodation. In Mexico, minors who illegally entered the country were not classed as having committed a criminal offence, but merely an infraction. All minors were held in special centres where they received specialized care from social workers.

The delegation clarified that Article 9 of the Constitution allowed foreigners to join any sort of association, with the exception of restrictions on joining political organizations. Workers and employers could enjoy their rights to form or participate in labour organizations, contrary to what had been asserted by the Immigration Forum.

It was true that Article 33 of the Constitution restricted the rights of foreigners to a hearing. The problem, the delegation noted, was that it was very difficult to reform the Constitution; it required a two-thirds majority. Even if amendments reached the required majority and were adopted at the national level, they still had to be adopted by each state legislature by a majority vote. There were currently two constitutional reform initiatives before the Congress. In one, only pre-trial hearings would be prohibited to foreigners if they represented national security threats, as set out in the law.

Further Questions by Committee Members

The Chairperson wished for more information on the situation of irregular migrants in Mexico, in particular with regard to the facilities and protections that were available to them. With regard to granting voting rights to emigrants, how was that possible, as it stated in the report, without the aid of the consular offices or embassies? An Expert requested statistics on convictions for trafficking over the past year. He also wished to know what policies or programmes were in place to protect migrant workers in the face of natural disasters, as they often bore the brunt of the damage caused by such disasters.

Noting that foreigners could not head trade unions in Mexico, an Expert recalled that Mexico had ratified ILO Convention No. 87 regarding the right to association, and wondered what the status of that Convention was in domestic legislation.

An Expert wished to underscore the point that had been made by the non-governmental organization, the Immigration Forum, that the Mexican military authorities should not be involved in verification procedures surrounding the migration process.

Statement by Representative of National Human Rights Commission of Mexico

A Representative of the National Human Rights Commission of Mexico, said he was pleased to share with the Committee the views of the Commission with respect to the human rights of migrants in Mexico. The migration phenomenon in Mexico had reached an enormous scale. There was increased migration of women and minors. Undocumented migrants were vulnerable. The National Human Rights Commission of Mexico had in 2005 and 2006 looked at 800 complaints by undocumented foreign migrants alleging abuse. Impunity for officials or gangs which carried out this abuse continued. The frequency of attacks on undocumented migrants was serious. There was also the issue of dealing with corrupt officials who used extortion against undocumented migrants. It seemed there was total indifference by the authorities towards this crime. Jails were being used to detain undocumented migrants and a woman nearly lost her life when she was attacked by a criminal. Also in holding centres, undocumented foreign migrants were kept in dark premises where they were humiliated and prevented from access to medical care. There was no way to punish those responsible for this abuse. Even after efforts to upgrade the conditions in the holding centres, there was still a lack of consular advice or services to those being held.

Reform in Mexico must include the decriminalisation of migration, because criminalization, among other things, provided fertile grounds for extortion and other abuse that migrants were exposed to by officials. The law must guarantee the human rights of migrants and must punish the perpetrators. There should be a comprehensive reform of the legal and constitutional framework concerning migrants in Mexico. Dignified treatment should be given to migrants in holding centres and they must be provided with legal help and medical services. A migration State policy must be elaborated in Mexico, dealing both with migration and immigration. Mexico should fight the violence on the border, and the presence of organized crime gangs and xenophobia there. The annual number of deaths on the border had more than doubled from 2001 to 2005, in comparison to 1994 to 2000. Migration had to be dealt with from a human perspective.

Further Questions and Comments by Committee Experts

One Expert asked how the National Human Rights Commission was constituted, and about its relationship with the Government. He asked about the ratio of responsibility in the complaints received by the Commission between Government officials and organized crime groups. Did prisons which detained undocumented migrants undergo renovations? The delegation of Mexico had recalled the universal principles of democracy and human rights and international law and had stressed that migrant policies must be organized on the national and regional level. How did the Government see the discrepancy between the values expressed and the reality in the practical terms? He said that with respect to the measures planned by the United States for its border with Mexico, it seemed like Mexico was doing the same thing with its southern neighbours.

Another Expert said the concerns expressed by the National Human Rights Commission of Mexico reflected the concerns of the Committee. Did the Commission make recommendations to the legislature to better understand the question of migrants in Mexico and to streamline the process and ensure that the issue of migration was properly addressed. Everyone was aware of the need for comprehensive reform. Did the Commission make recommendations to local mayors or police on these matters?

An Expert said that the statement of the National Human Rights Commission came in sharp contrast to what the delegation said yesterday; it came as a surprise as the Commission said that the real state of affairs was different. Had the efforts that the delegation of Mexico outlined yesterday actually been elaborated, and could the delegation provide specific answers with statistics?

Response by Delegation

In response to the questions, the delegation of Mexico said the National Human Rights Commission received complaints concerning alleged violations. When it received them, the Commission processed them and challenged the authorities responsible. The recommendations made by the Commission were not legally binding, but carried a moral weight. If the authorities did not agree with the recommendations of the Commission, they discussed the issue until there was a reconciliation of views. However, the Commission was neither a prosecutor nor a court. It was an autonomous body of constitutional rank, and there were a number of such bodies in Mexico.

Concerning the questions on the difference between what the delegation said and what the National Human Rights Commission said, Mexico had agreed to be reviewed by this UN body, and this was part of the Government’s strategy with human rights treaty bodies. Mexico in recent years had opened its doors to international scrutiny and tried to ensure that its domestic legislation was compatible with human rights conventions. This was not an easy undertaking, but there was an enormous commitment on account of the present administration. Mexico was doing its level best.

Concerning questions on the electoral procedures and the participation of Mexicans living abroad, this had been a first and successful effort which was taken in a climate of considerable uncertainty. The Government Bill said that only Mexicans living abroad who had credentials as electors and who were listed on the electoral rolls could vote. Only 50,000 votes were cast, and if compared to the estimated number of Mexican migrants abroad, this might seem small, but the legislation was enacted as a means to taking a first step towards greater participation in the future.

The Mexican Constitution guaranteed equal pay for equal work without taking account of gender or nationality. The labour officials at the federal and local levels were responsible for ensuring that work conditions and safety and social security regulations followed the law. As for ensuring social security for migrants, Mexico had signed conventions with a number of social security bodies in different countries since the 1960s on this issue.

Concerning foreign migrants and trade unions, the idea was for the State to take note of the existence of trade union organizations and their elections. At the federal level, the Labour and Social Security Ministry registered the trade unions. At the local level, the local boards for arbitration registered trade unions.

With regards to the issue of trafficking in persons, Mexico was actively participating in the negotiation of multilateral conventions to protect the victims of trafficking in persons. This way, it ensured that it adapted its national legislation to international standards.

On whether Mexico was engaged in a parliamentary legislative process to adopt a specific law on migration, the delegation said this was not the case. There was no draft legislation which referred solely to migration issues. There was the General Population Act and its set of regulations which provided the basic system with respect to the issue of migration. There was an idea to amend the General Population Act.

Concerning regularizing undocumented migrants, the Government was trying to spread awareness of the migration regularization programme so that the National Institute for Migration could regularize the situation of undocumented migrants. Maybe the Committee could help in this. There was a stigma relating to the Institute, maybe because of the abuses in the past by migration authorities, and many undocumented migrants were still afraid of the Institute. The Government was trying to alleviate these fears and ensure that undocumented migrants went to the Institute to regularize their situation. Since the migration regularization programme had been established, the situation of 15,000 undocumented migrants had been regularized.

Concerning complaints by migrants of discrimination, from 2004 to date, there had been two complaints brought up by non-governmental organizations. One concerned a Salvadorian national and that matter had been resolved. The second concerned two nationals of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and no decision had been handed down on that.

The protection of the rights of migrants was part of the fundamental tenants of the Ministry of Foreign Relations of Mexico. Mexico’s consular services in the United States made up the largest consular service system in the world. However, since 1991, a programme of mobile consular services had also been in action to bring consular services to Mexican compatriots who could not reach the consulates.

With regards to the number of identified cases of trafficking in human beings, some 2,000 investigations had been carried out since 2000, with 319 cases sent for further study and research by other bodies and the others dismissed.

Employees of the National Institute for Migration were given training programmes and the Government hoped to work towards best practices, the delegation said. The Institute’s understandings with the International Organization for Migration aimed to refine the Institute’s migration management issues. Some 50 per cent of the 170-odd training programmes related to human rights issues, including trafficking. On criterion on whether or not to secure undocumented migrants, there were 172 entry points in the country and the Institute had units along all these border points. Securing undocumented migrants took place in coordination with the International Organization for Migration and the federal and municipal authorities. The Institute was trying to prevent transboundary trafficking in persons head on and in a direct manner.

The Migration Authority had wide powers to apply the principle of family reunion, whether it was minors who were outside the national territory of whether they were young people who had reached the age of majority but still wished to join the family. The Migration Authority had the ability to make this happen and tried to ensure that cases were settled quickly, in around 30 days on average.

The figures provided by the National Human Rights Commission on the number of complaints concurred fully with the figures of the National Institute for Migration. The Institute also had many other mechanisms for receiving complaints from migrants. Complaints included extortion, theft, rape, illegal deprivation of freedom, use of prisons as migrant holding centres, failure to provide consular notification, violence, and neglect of the Mexican State to such abuses and others. The Mexican State and its Federal executive arm had sought to ensure consistency in the implementation and formulation of migration policies. This was a matter of concern to the Mexican State, not just the Federal government. Concerning transmigrants, the data the government had was overtaken by events and it was working with congress and non-governmental organizations to ensure the harmonization of the appropriate legal framework. The main thing was to ensure that Mexico could adopt legislation that fully preserved the human rights of migrants.

The delegation said much remained to be done, and it was true that Mexico still had major problems relating to migration, but the State was making major changes and was altering the mindset of the authorities dealing with migrants. The intention was to establish a new migration culture, one that was fully consistent with the requirements and obligations of Mexico and which could be applicable to everyone. In the last two decades, the Government had been working on ensuring all human rights.

On the effect on migrants of natural disasters and the internal conflict, the State recognized these problems existed and was working at different paces when dealing with the two categories of problems.

Concerning visits by the Mexican and Guatemalan authorities to coffee plantations in the south of Mexico where Guatemalans works, the authorities were providing documents to these Guatemalans and hoped that with the Guatemalan employment authorities, that they would be able to eliminate any acts of corrupt and protect the employment rights of Guatemalan citizens.

Preliminary Remarks

ANA ELIZABETH CUBIAS-MEDINA, Committee Expert acting as country rapporteur for the report of Mexico, said the Committee had conducted a pretty thorough and exhaustive study of the Mexican report with the delegation, as well as with non-governmental organizations and the National Human Rights Commission of Mexico which gave a comprehensive view of the complexity of the issue of migration on Mexican territory. The Committee was also aware of the work of Mexico to harmonize its laws with international standards, and the authorities must work on both these fronts.

The Committee welcomed Mexico’s efforts to adapt to its position as a country of origin, transit and immigration. There was still a need to update legislation. It was not enough to amend the General Population Act, and a Migration Act was needed which should ensure the human rights of undocumented migrants and transmigrants. The Committee acknowledged the efforts made at the Federal level, but it was concerned about the involvement of authorities which were not authorized to deal with migrants. There needed to be follow-up to ensure that this abuse of power was cut short.

The use of prisons as holding centres was totally reprehensible because it violated human rights, and attention should be paid to this matter. Also, all provisions which provided criminal punishment for illegal migrants should be abolished. Even though they were not implemented, as long as these provisions remained on the books, some officials might use them to extort migrants.

Mexico was on the right path and was doing everything it could, but it should still address these urgent issues. The Committee welcomed the Mexican delegation which presented the report and thanked it for its efforts, Ms. Cubias-Medina concluded.

PRASAD KARIYAWASAM, the Chairperson of the Committee, thanked the delegation for the substantive and fulfilling dialogue. The Committee had learnt about the progress made and the challenges faced by Mexico. The Committee recongized the difficulties faced by Mexico, which was confronted by increased migration from Central America and transmigrants. Mexico was a country of origin, transit and immigration. The Committee appreciated the work of the Mexican authorities to protect the rights of Mexican workers abroad, and to ensure the rights of transmigrants. However, despite these efforts, the Committee still had concerns about the implementation of the rules on the ground. There were some loopholes in the legislative framework and that meant there was room for improvement there. Migrant children and women continued to be particularly exposed to human rights violations, especially trafficking. These issues and the Government’s efforts to deal with them would be reflected in the Committee’s final observations and recommendations which would be issued on 3 November. The Committee hoped that the Mexican Government would use these observations to help with the implementation of the provisions of the Convention in the country.

Mr. Kariyawasam said he was optimistic as Mexico was already on the right way. He welcomed the efforts by the authorities to develop a new migrant culture and a new migrant mindset.