COMMITTEE ON THE PROTECTION OF THE RIGHTS OF MIGRANT WORKERS OPENS FIFTEENTH SESSION

The Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families this morning opened its fifteenth session, during which the Committee will review the initial reports of Argentina, Chile and Guatemala on how those countries are fulfilling their obligations under the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. The Committee heard an address by the United Nations Chief of the Groups in Focus Section of the Human Rights Treaties Division of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Wan-Hea Lee, updating members on developments since their last session, and also heard from non-governmental organizations and national human rights institutions on the situation in Argentina, Chile and Guatemala.

In her remarks, Wan-Hea Lee commented on the expansion of the Treaty Body system and on the reforms that were currently being discussed, such as harmonization of the function of all treaty bodies. Concerning the developments and challenges related to migration between April and August 2011, Ms. Lee emphasized that events in North Africa had continued to dominate the news as significant numbers of migrants continued to leave Libya and other countries in the region. Around the world, migration continued to be a risky and often fatal business. The Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights estimated that more than 1,400 migrants had died at sea between North Africa and Europe since the start of 2011. Tougher border controls could indeed heighten the risk of death or injury to migrants, as they are forced to increasingly dangerous modes of travel; including falling prey to traffickers, in order to evade such controls.

Committee Chairperson Abdelhamid El Jamri said that migrants were becoming increasingly more vulnerable. He noted that this was the Committee’s first green session and hoped that it would be a success. Mr. El Jamri said that the session held a number of challenges, as the understanding of the issue of migrant workers was not always developed and States sometimes thought that it would give advantages to illegal workers if they respected this convention.

Experts in attendance spoke about various migrant-related issues. One Expert commented that the Committee should monitor the situation in other countries, even if their report was not being examined during the current session. He said that in Libya, for example, migrant workers were currently terribly affected and asked whether the High Commissioner had taken any action on the situation. Another Expert talked about El Salvador, because the country was considering adhering to the Convention. An Expert mentioned a new law on migration in Mexico, the first law of its type in that country, which took into account the obligations of the state at an international level.

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) made statements on the situation in Argentina, Chile and Guatemala. On Argentina, one NGO said that the State still had issues implementing the Convention, and that Argentina set demands for impossible pre-requisites, especially for states outside of the MERCOSUR agreement. An NGO said that in Argentina social security policy concerning children was still too weak, and distinguished between Argentinean children and migrant children, a ruling that did not comply with the Convention. Another NGO said that Argentina’s constitution did provide free legal assistance and translation for migrants, although there were still some challenges, such as prohibition of entry and stay. An NGO stated that 130,000 migrant workers were victims of trafficking in Argentina.

In Chile, there was a need to look at migrants’ right to education, an NGO said. The phenomenon of migration to Chile was a new one and consequently the image of immigrants was negative. An NGO said that migrant women in Chile suffered double discrimination, as so many worked as casual labour with no legal protection. However, Chile now had a law against smuggling and trafficking of women and girls.

Speaking about Guatemala, an NGO said that migrants there often suffered discrimination by the state authorities, who treated migrants as a national security issue. Migrants who worked in drug trafficking were mentioned, as well as migrant workers used for sexual exploitation. However, the NGO noted that elections for a new government were being held in Guatemala today, that from 2012 to 2016 migration would be a government commitment, and that it was hoped that the new government would develop a national policy on migrants.

The non-governmental organizations speaking today were the Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales, Handicap International, International Federation for Human Rights, Asociacion de Chilenos en el Exterior, Centro Regional de Derechos Humanos y Justicia de Genero, MENAGIG and Pastoral de Movilidad.

When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it will start its consideration of the initial report of Argentina.

Statement by the Chief of the Groups in Focus Section of the Human Rights Treaties Division

WAN-HEA LEE, United Nations Chief of the Groups in Focus Session of the Human Rights Treaties Division, in an opening statement, said that world events had once again proven the urgent need for the world to confront the reality of ever increasing mobility, the search for more economic opportunities, or the need to flee natural and man-made disasters. She welcomed the special attention the experts would be paying to a particular vulnerable group, the migrant workers in an irregular situation, as well as the members of their family.

She emphasized that this session was also important because it was the last before the High Commissioner summed up the results of two years of consultations with all stakeholders, with a report presenting her proposals for treaty body strengthening. It was therefore the last meeting at which the experts would be able to contribute any further reflections that they wanted to share with her.

Ms. Lee welcomed the growth of the treaty body system. On 31 May 2011, the ten inaugural members of the Committee on Enforced Disappearances were elected and the first meeting of the State parties to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance took place in New York. This long awaited Committee would hold its first session in November this year. She also noted that the Human Rights Council adopted during its seventeenth session the text of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and for the first time, a resolution expressing grave concern about acts of violence and discrimination against individuals because of their sexual orientation and gender identity.

Ms. Lee then dealt with the strengthening of treaty bodies. One reform envisaged was to align all engagement procedures of treaty bodies. She highlighted that the experts were really the ones who could bring about change and that they could succeed if they were united with the same vision. The High Commissioner emphasized during the Inter-Committee meeting that despite economic difficulties, States cannot avoid their responsibilities, and that it was regrettable that the treaty body system functions with a 35 per cent reporting compliance rate. Ms. Lee also mentioned that a number of interesting decisions were taken by the treaty bodies’ Chairpersons during their twenty-third meeting. They decided to engage in a drafting process for guidelines on the independence and expertise of members of treaty bodies.

Ms. Lee expressed her thanks for the efforts to implement the United Nations greening policy. The Secretariat would ensure that the implementation of the greening policy would not interfere with the quality of the experts’ work.

Concerning the developments and challenges related to migration in April-August 2011, Ms. Lee emphasized that events in North Africa had continued to dominate the news as significant numbers of migrants continued to leave Libya and other countries in the region. Around the world, migration continued to be a risky and often fatal business. The Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights estimated that more than 1,400 migrants had died at sea between North Africa and Europe since the start of 2011. Tougher border controls could indeed heighten the risk of death or injury to migrants, as they are forced to increasingly dangerous modes of travel; including falling prey to traffickers, in order to evade such controls. The Office of the High Commissioner would present a report on these issues during the eighteenth session of the Human Rights Council. It set out human rights standards relevant to migrants on issues including collective expulsion; rescue at sea, the prohibition of violence, racism, xenophobia and related intolerance against migrants, as well as immigration detention.

Ms. Lee welcomed the recent ratification to the Convention by Bangladesh, which brought the number of State parties to 45; and she introduced the new secretary of the Committee, Jakob Schneider. Concerning the present session, she said that it would be busy, with three reports under consideration: Argentina, Chile and Guatemala; the discussion and adoption of list of issues for Tajikistan and Paraguay and the thematic discussion on the rights of migrant workers in an irregular situation and members of their families. She then wished the Committee a productive session.

Discussion with Committee Members

ABDELHAMID EL JAMRI, Committee Chairperson, thanked Ms. Lee for her intervention. He noted that migrants were becoming increasingly more vulnerable. Since April especially, there had been a need to call for the mobilization of all countries to protect migrants. Mr. Jamri thanked the High Commissioner for her support and thanked the Secretariat for their help. An important report summarizing the Committee’s work would come out at the beginning of 2012. The Committee welcomed the new Committee on Enforced Disappearances. This new committee would strengthen the United Nations. Experts had an important role to play; they should be able to mobilize resources. Unfortunately, some meetings might not take place next year due to financial issues.

The Chairperson highlighted that this was the Committee’s first green session and hoped it would be a success. He said that this session held a number of challenges to do with the countries they would examine. There would also be a day of general discussion, a topic that was not easy. The understanding of the issues of migrant workers was not always developed and States sometimes thought that it would give advantages to illegal workers if they respected this convention.

One Expert commented that the Committee should keep an eye on other countries even if their report was not being examined during the present session. He said that in Libya, for example, the situation lacked clarity. Migrant workers were currently terribly affected in that country, and Libya was a state party. He asked whether the High Commissioner had taken any action on this situation. Another committee member reported on the events that took place since the last meeting, for example the sixth Ministerial Conference on July 1 2011 in Vilnius, which was attended by United States Secretary of State Mrs. Clinton. The Committee exhorted all participants to adhere to the Convention.

Another Expert talked about El Salvador because the country was considering adhering to the Convention. The Committee was interested in ratification of course, but also in implementation. A lot of efforts were being made to raise awareness about the situation of migrants in that country. An expert talked about the new law on migration in Mexico. There was no law on migration before as such. It took into account the obligations of the state at an international level.

Ms. Lee thanked the experts for their summary on inter-session activities. In anticipation of the discussions she introduced a proposal on how to deal with state parties, which consisted of not relying on state party initiatives to present a report, but basically to move towards a list of issues prior to reporting. States should then be invited to respond to the list. There was a broader proposal as well; that the treaty bodies create a master calendar, on a five-year cycle, in advance. It would be more manageable for committees to know in advance what would be covered. The state parties should cover a certain number of treaty bodies per year, although the system would not cover what happens if there is an emergency.

The Chairperson then adopted the agenda.

Statements by National Human Rights Institutions and Non-Governmental Organizations on Argentina, Chile and Guatemala


GABRIELA KLETZEL, of the Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales, believed that the Argentinean state still had issues implementing the Convention. The regularization plan of Argentina had not reached its objectives. Almost 200,000 migrants had not been able to file their demand. It was not clear why the plan had been so weak. Also, Argentina set demands for impossible pre-requisites. States outside of the MERCOSUR agreement, such as Senegal and Dominican Republic, had particular problems. There was a de facto exclusion of some groups from regulation policies. The way irregularity of a worker was determined, for example, was not satisfying; and one noticed an unequal and arbitrary application of the law. Moreover, there was no information system that created a uniform registry. The migrants in detention were often not aware that they had a right to defence.

Social security policy concerning children was still too weak. It also distinguished between Argentinean children and migrant children, which did not comply with the Convention.

FACUNDO CHAVEZ, of Handicap International, emphasised that the situation of handicapped migrants in Argentina was particularly difficult and their access to insurance should be facilitated.

CLAIRE COLARDELLE, presenting the joint report of the International Federation for Human Rights and the Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales, commended Argentina’s constitution as fairly good for migrants. There was free legal assistance and translation. There were still some challenges, such as prohibition of entry and stay, and expulsion with prohibition of return for five years. People had to prove they had entered Argentina legally: thus there was no presumption of innocence. Senegalese people had been expelled without judicial review, some because they had a criminal record even though they had already been punished for the crime. Approximately 130,000 migrant workers were victims of trafficking in Argentina. Many could not conclude the regularization of their situation. Xenophobia had also affected migrants in Argentina, as seen in an incident this year in an area of Buenos Aires.

FRESNEL OLIBRICE, of the Asociacion de Chilenos en el Exterior, said there was a need to look at the right to education in Chile for migrants. Many migrants did not know they had rights, so this Non Governmental Agency worked on that issue. The phenomenon of migration to Chile was a new one, therefore the image of immigrants was negative. Consequently many immigrants had a hard time, for example black women. Last year in Chile it was impossible for a foreigner to attend a university because the system had not adapted.

CATALINA LAGOS, of the Centro Regional de Derechos Humanos y Justicia de Genero, highlighted that for migrant woman there was double discrimination. Women often worked as casual labour which made their situation even more difficult. Legislation did not provide protection for the women who worked in illegal labour conditions, such as ten hours per day, six days per week. Domestic standards had to reach international standards. There was now a law against smuggling and trafficking of women and girls. However the State should provide rules to protect the victims and not expel them from the country. There was a need for measures to avoid statelessness.

ALVARO CABALLERO, of MENAGIG, regretted that there was no law for free legal aid for migrants without resources. There was a need to look at the situation of migrants in hostels, for example. It was strategic to have a public migratory policy that was a state policy and to guarantee continuity on a regional and transnational level. Guatemala was part of the biggest migration corridors in the world, with 300,000 persons per year. The law did not allow for authorization of unskilled workers and this should be changed. Also, there were migrants who returned to Guatemala every year. The State should develop a policy on that issue and help those migrants. One of the main requests of Guatemalans in the United States was to vote from abroad; a request not currently heard.

MAURO VERZELLETI, of the Pastoral de Movilidad, congratulated the Committee for giving time to the Guatemalan groups to speak. In a globalized context, the dignity of migrant workers should be globalized too. There was a social structure which did not provide many opportunities for migrants to work. There was often discrimination by the state authorities, such as from the Ministry of Labour. Often they treated migrants as a national security issue. It was covered in the Convention for Migrant Workers that they do have rights and those rights should be protected. Guatemala held elections today. From 2012 to 2016 Migration would be a commitment and they hoped that the new government would develop a national policy. It was a sad situation that drug trafficking provided work for migrants in the country. The use of workers for sexual exploitation was also a complex situation that needed to be dealt with. The repatriation of persons takes an enormous amount of time.

The Chairperson thanked the non-governmental organizations for coming to Geneva and for giving the Committee all this information.

Discussion with Committee Members

One Expert highlighted the direct lack of implementation of the Convention. She asked whether the Convention could be immediately implemented or not. On the topic of Guatemala, she asked what the shelter conditions were at the moment. She asked what the food and hygiene situation was in hostels, and whether there were specific conditions and help provided for trafficking victims. She also wanted to know about detention procedures. She asked whether the army had a role in detaining migrants. Guatemala had built a wall to stop migrants from crossing the river, despite previously asking the United States not to build a border wall. Guatemala should not forget that it is also a return country. Salvador had a welcome home programme and Guatemala should have one too.

A Committee member noticed that the non-governmental organizations from Argentina and Chile had strong legal training. He asked them if Argentina and Chile had signed a bilateral agreement regarding migrant workers.

Another Committee member asked for more details about the demand of Guatemalans to have the right to vote from abroad. Another Expert asked if the non-governmental were contacted, consulted or if they were asked to submit documents to the state agencies preparing the state report.

GABRIELA KLETZEL, of the Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales, answered that Argentina had a monist system. Non-governmental organizations would like the Committee to adopt a strong final decision stating that states really should implement the Convention. They asked for the situation with Senegalese migrant workers to be regularised.

CATALINA LAGOS, of the Centro Regional de Derechos Humanos y Justicia de Genero, commented that the Convention was not always given superiority. Concerning bilateral treaties, she answered that there were a number already.

MAURO VERZELLETI, from Pastoral de Movilidad, said that kidnappings are taking place, and the repression against migrant workers was persistent. The market of drug trafficking was particularly tricky because even police officers were implicated in it.


For use of the information media; not an official record

CMW11/008E