Carol Proner on the migration pact: an inexplicable international embarrassment.

247 - Brazil's abandonment of the UN Migration Pact, by decision of Jair Bolsonaro's government, will undoubtedly cause damage to the country's international image and indicates "incivility, inhumanity and coldness in the treatment of migrants, that is, pure barbarism, since it contributes to xenophobia packaged in far-right discourse." This assessment comes from jurist Carol Proner, PhD in International Law, professor at UFRJ and founding member of ABJD, in an interview with 247. Carol Proner is also a member of the Editorial Board of Brasil 247.

"What the Bolsonaro government is indicating, with the abandonment of yet another commitment regarding human rights, is incivility, inhumanity, and coldness in the treatment of migrants—in other words, pure barbarism—since it contributes to the xenophobia packaged in far-right rhetoric," she says, adding that the decision is contradictory, given that "the number of Brazilians living abroad is almost double or even triple the number of migrants received."

The legal expert also points out that, unlike other countries that have withdrawn from the pact, such as Hungary, Poland, and Austria, which she also considers "regrettable," Brazil, "with a population of only 750 migrants living in Brazilian territory, out of a total of 200 million, represents 0,4% of the country's population, according to data from the Federal Police, which makes this decision, at the very least, pretentious, assuming that Brazil can impact the already calamitous global situation."

Check out the full interview:

In your opinion, what is the message the federal government is sending when it refuses to participate in this pact?

Amidst the pronouncements and contradictions of a government that is astonishing in its ability to produce factoids via Twitter, the news that Brazil has abandoned the Migration Pact, technically called the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM), is now confirmed. We learned of telegrams sent by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in which the chancellery reportedly requested Brazilian diplomats and missions to inform relevant international bodies, the UN Secretary-General, and the Director-General of the International Organization for Migration of the withdrawal.

The decision, besides being regrettable from the point of view of (lack of) civility, is yet another inexplicable international embarrassment, or one that can only be justified within a profoundly subservient logic. And a rather immodest one, moreover, since Brazil is not even a priority country for migratory flows.

This retreat is also illogical because the Global Compact is not an international treaty, but an intergovernmental agreement to improve the management of global migration problems. As such, it is not binding, does not generate sanctions for non-compliance, does not create new rights, and does not subject or condition the development of autonomous and sovereign policies.

What the Bolsonaro government is demonstrating, by abandoning yet another commitment to human rights, is incivility, inhumanity, and coldness in its treatment of migrants—in other words, pure barbarism—since it contributes to the xenophobia fueled by far-right rhetoric.

What is the importance of the Global Compact and what does it require of each country?

The immediate precedent for this Pact is a consensus reached in 2016 with the "New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants," when the world acknowledged that the increase in migration is a global problem requiring cooperation among all nations. Since April 2017, through a Resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly, the modalities and deadline for signing the Global Compact have been defined. All countries, except the United States, participated in the negotiations that have resulted, to date, in the accession of two-thirds of the members (164 of the 193 member countries of the United Nations).

Even if non-binding, in the sense hard lawThe Pact is a politically valid cooperative commitment that understands migration and human trafficking as incidental phenomena, a vicious cycle that only increases the number of victims in a state of absolute vulnerability. The document foresees, as central objectives, the development of information systems on international migration, precisely to minimize factors that force people to leave their countries and, consequently, to find alternatives to reduce vulnerabilities and combat smuggling and human trafficking.

In short, the Global Compact foresees the strengthening of measures already addressed in other conventional documents, within the framework of the UN and regional systems, such as the classic principle of non-refoulement, understood as an imperative of international law (jus cogens). The Compact defines that migrants cannot be immediately returned/deported and that each case must be analyzed individually. It also stipulates that migrants will have the right to identification documents and that detention should be a last resort and, when necessary, should be as short as possible. The document reinforces provisions of the Refugee Convention, access to justice, basic humanitarian rights such as health, living conditions, education and information, and reaffirms the obvious humanitarian principle: collective deportations and discrimination of any kind as a criterion for remaining are prohibited.

The new Brazilian Migration Law, enacted in May 2017, is fully aligned with the content of the Global Compact, treating migration as a human right and a contemporary issue, combating xenophobia and discrimination. Therefore, the Bolsonaro government's decision violates Brazil's tradition as a welcoming, racially mixed, and intercultural country, opting instead for pandering to far-right governments around the world.

To withdraw from the Global Compact for Migration, President Jair Bolsonaro argues that Brazil is sovereign to decide on the matter. Does the Compact, in any way, infringe upon the sovereignty of countries?

Let's leave that answer to someone who, in the eyes of the right, is not suspected of bias: the former Foreign Minister of the Temer government, Aloysio Nunes Ferreira, for whom the Pact "seeks only to serve as a reference for the organization of migratory flows, without the slightest interference in the sovereign definition by each country of its migration policy."

We know that the reaction of other countries to the Global Compact is directly related to the serious migration problems faced by Europeans. Among the dissenting countries, in a reversal in the final months of negotiations, are Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Austria. Bulgaria, Switzerland, Australia, and Italy also positioned themselves against it. I consider this retreat regrettable, unacceptable, but understandable, since the issue occupies a large portion of the political agenda of these countries. But Brazil? With a population of only 750 migrants living in Brazilian territory, out of a total of 200 million, this represents 0,4% of the country's population, according to data from the Federal Police, which makes this decision, at the very least, presumptuous, supposing that Brazil can impact the already calamitous global situation. Besides being immodest, we were also unsympathetic.

Could this measure affect Brazilians living abroad? Or Brazil's international image?

This is the most contradictory aspect. The number of Brazilians living abroad is almost double, or even triple, depending on the metric, the number of migrants received. According to data from the International Migration Report of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat (DESA), in 2017 there were around 1,6 million Brazilians abroad. However, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MRE) registered more than 3 million Brazilians abroad in 2016, of which 750 were in Europe alone.

It is not possible to say that the Brazilian government's abrupt decision will directly affect these people, since it is up to each country, sovereignly, to establish criteria for its migration policy. But there is no doubt that it will cause further damage to its image, fueling the already growing symbolic image of hostility, lack of reciprocity towards other countries, and disregard for human rights. This is already inseparable from Bolsonaro. and cave This label of being crude and uninformed from the far right is exacerbated by episodes such as Brazil's refusal to host the UN Climate Conference, or threats to withdraw from the Paris Agreement.

It is sad to realize how this kind of thoughtless attitude can reverse the achievements of recent years, even when Brazil, judging by the number of expatriates compared to those welcomed, enjoys twice the right to emigrate.