Define Safe Third Country Agreement

If Mexico signs an agreement on a safe third country, Central American migrants would no longer be able to cross the U.S.-Mexico border to surrender to U.S. authorities and remain in the country pending asylum proceedings. Under the agreement, refugee claimants must apply for refugee protection in the first safe country they arrive in, unless they are entitled to a waiver from the agreement. As of February 2017, more and more refugees have begun to cross the Canadian border at locations other than official border checkpoints. To avoid the effects of the agreement, all refugees at a border crossing would be automatically repatriated to the United States, in accordance with the CAB provisions. [24] Since it is not illegal to cross the border outside a port of entry under the Immigration and Refugee Act or the rules associated with it, as long as the person immediately reports to a Canada Border Services Agency official and st.c.a. does not apply to rights outside a port of entry, these are persons who otherwise are not entitled to assert their rights after an irregular crossing. Possible. [25] In some cases, these refugees have been amputated by frostbite[23] and concerns have been expressed that some refugees may freeze to death while crossing the border. [26] Under the Third Country Security Agreement, in force since December 2004, Canada and the United States declare the other country safe for refugees and close the door to most refugees at the U.S.-Canada border.

The RAC continues to call on the Canadian government to withdraw from the safe third country agreement. Shortly after its entry into force, the CCR participated in legal action against the designation of the United States as a safe third country. The Federal Court of Justice ruled that the United States is not a safe third country, but the decision was overturned on appeal for technical reasons (for more information, click here). Safe country status and the right to asylum in general are based on several UN conventions governing the movement of persons. A convention is not to return asylum seekers to a country where their safety would be threatened. Section 102 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) authorizes the designation of safe third countries for the purposes of co-responsibility for refugee applications. Only countries that respect human rights and offer a high level of protection to asylum seekers can be designated as safe third countries. On January 30, 2017, critic Jenny Kwan of the New Democratic Party (PND) of IMMIGRATION, refugees and citizens of Canada (IRCC) proposed an emergency debate on “President Trump`s immigration and travel ban from seven countries in the Middle East and North Africa.” [17] During the debate, the NDP called on the government to immediately suspend the agreement on the security of third-country nationals, citing the fact that “Canada can no longer trust that the U.S. refugee system provides refuge for those at risk of persecution.” [18] The official Conservative Party of Canada has stated that it will not oppose the suspension of the agreement,[19] while the Green Party of Canada has expressed support for the suspension of the agreement. [20] The Canadian Refugee Council strongly opposes the agreement because the United States is not a safe country for all refugees. The CCR also denounces the objective and impact of reducing the number of refugees who can seek refuge in Canada. “Many migrants are arbitrarily detained in treatment centres in poor conditions when they are arrested,” says the report on the capacity of refugees in Mexico.

The government of Mexican President Andrés Manuel Lépez Obrador has cut immigration and refugee budgets for 2019, leaving the country`s refugee agency to less than $1 million for the year and the National Migration Institute with about $70 million in operating budget.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.