COMMITTEE ON PROTECTION OF MIGRANT WORKERS HOLDS DIALOGUE WITH NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION ON BOLIVIAN MIGRANTS’ RIGHTS
The Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families this afternoon heard from a non-governmental organization, the Scalabrini International Migration Network, on the report to be presented by Bolivia to the Committee later this week.
Leonir Chiarello of the Scalabrini International Migration Network said, with regard to the situation in Bolivia and the initial report of Bolivia to the Committee, that considering the challenges, and the duties undertaken by Bolivia under the Convention, the information made available by the Bolivian Government on the principal migratory trends in the country, as well as the living conditions, the status, and the ability of migrants and their families to enjoy their rights, was scant– a condition which had a direct impact on the effective protection of the rights of migrant workers and their families. That undoubtedly revealed the need for a permanent updating of the analysis of the migratory phenomenon in Bolivia, both into and out of the country, as well as its repercussions on the different sectors of life in the country.
Regarding the legislation in place, Mr. Chiarello said that Supreme Decree 24423 regulated issues related to migration in Bolivia, and could be considered as the legal instrument for the implementation of the Convention. That legislation had certain defects, however, and the mechanisms in it designed for the protection of migrants became merely paper procedures, with difficult and limited real application. The Decree, among others, defined the procedures for regularizing the situation of migrants – that is, the possibility of obtaining a residence permit – as well as the deadlines for doing so. However, in practice, those administrative deadlines were not complied with. Excessive bureaucracy was one of the main causes of that delay in the National Migration Service. That led to considerable delays for migrants in regularizing their situation. There were also high fees to be paid by migrants. Long delays, failure to meet procedural deadlines and the cost of procedures had three important consequences: the Decree did not provide specific protection for migrants while they were undergoing registration procedures; there was an unjustified delay which perpetuated the illegal or irregular stay of the migrant, leading to legal uncertainty for the worker and his family; and, thirdly, the situation could lead immigrants, as well as to those contracting migrant labour, to become discouraged from pursuing the procedure for regularization and to work outside of it.
In addition to the shortcomings just mentioned, a number of articles in the Decree had been derogated from since its entry into force and a number of its articles had been declared unconstitutional, Mr. Chiarello underscored. Moreover, the weak inter-institutional coordination between government agencies and non-governmental organizations further hampered the enjoyment of rights by migrants and their families. So, despite the far-reaching legislation Bolivia had put in place, a far-reaching revision was needed regarding tariffs and the deadlines for visas to be provided and the regularization of migratory status for Bolivians living abroad.
Concerning institutions, there was a need for streamlined proceedings and reduced costs if the process were to guarantee the proper exercise of the rights of migrants. It was undoubtedly essential to strengthen the institutions charged with such tasks, and in particular the National Migration Service. All of that was a sine qua non for the effective implementation of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families in practice.
While one could not deny that Bolivia had been implementing legislation for the Convention, all the considerations above meant that the legislation and the administrative procedures were a dead letter, Mr. Chiarello said.
Regarding the protection of Bolivian citizens living abroad, one third of all Bolivians, or some 3 million persons, lived outside of the country, most of them of working age, Mr. Chiarello reported. A good number of those emigrants were living in an irregular situation in the countries to which they had migrated, for example Spain, where two thirds of the 200,000 Bolivian immigrants there were living irregularly. Those immigrants were particularly vulnerable to exploitation and the subject of regular complaints for fraud. No political action had been taken to address that issue.
Another vulnerable group were migrant children, and there was also the issue of the crime of trafficking in children which was linked to that area. To help combat that, Bolivia should enact bilateral agreements on labour issues, social and economic rights, and on family reunification with the countries to which it had such migratory ties. Moreover, civil society should be encouraged to protect the civil and labour rights of Bolivian migrants and their families.
In conclusion, with regard to both the protection of migrants resident in Bolivia and Bolivian citizens resident abroad, Mr. Chiarello believed that there was a need to develop an explicit migratory policy in Bolivia, which could take the form of a migration act, which could harmonize and conform the present migration legislation with international standards with regard to different issues surrounding migration, including labour rights, refugees and asylum-seekers.
In the ensuing discussion, Experts asked, among others, why there was a need for a single migration act containing all the necessary legislation, as it was such a broad subject. An Expert wondered which of the articles of the migration Supreme Decree were being applied, given that some of them were declared unconstitutional. As for the Bolivian migrants living irregularly in Spain, why had they not been able to benefit from recent Spanish legislation regarding the regularization of migrant workers there, an Expert asked? An Expert was concerned about the figures given in the presentation. Whereas the Network said there were some 3 million Bolivian immigrants living abroad, the report by Bolivia had cited 1.3 to 1.6 million. An Expert wondered if there were other factors playing into the long delays in the administrative procedures connected with migration in Bolivia, such as corruption or nepotism, and asked for further information. Could the Committee have some precise examples of the working of the Supreme Decree so that members could judge whether or not it was in conformity with the Convention?
As for the figures, Mr. Chiarello repeated that the problem was that there was a lack of information, which meant there could be no clear analysis of Bolivian immigration statistics. There was a question of methodology as well regarding the figures obtained in censuses that were held only every 10 years, whereas migratory flows changed drastically over a decade. The figures the Network came up with were based on a number of studies carried out by the Center for Migration Studies in New York and others. Another factor was the fact that a good number of Bolivian migrants were in an irregular situation. The figure that the Network supplied was between 1.5 and 3 million.
Regarding the unconstitutional nature of some of the articles in the Decree, together with the repeal of some of the articles in the Decree, those actions had been undertaken by the Bolivian Government, Mr. Chiarello said. That action necessarily had an impact on the implementation of the Decree in the country, in particular with regard to regularization of migratory flows.
When the Committee meets at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 15 April, it will hold a brief public meeting to elect a new Bureau from among its members, before moving into a private session. Then in the afternoon, starting at 3 p.m., the Committee will take up its consideration of the initial report of Syria (CMW/C/SYR/1).
For use of the information media; not an official record
CMW0803E