On March 3 at 9:00 a.m. Washington time, the IACHR held a hearing on the risks faced by refugees and asylum seekers in Argentina. Representatives of civil society, the national government, and UNHCR participated, presenting their concerns before the Commissioners.
The decree introduces substantial modifications to Law 26.165 on the recognition and protection of refugees, disregarding the processes, experiences, and needs that led to its adoption. In this regard, it eliminates the possibility of appealing a negative decision at the administrative level, imposing a strict five-day deadline to file a judicial appeal, which requires legal representation. Additionally, it arbitrarily broadens the grounds for exclusion, undermining the principle of innocence as well as the humanitarian, apolitical, and solidarity-based nature of refugee status.
“With the publication of Decree No. 942/2024 in October of last year, the modification of the composition of CONARE (the National Commission for Refugees), and the closed-door regulation of the Refugee Law, the State is failing to comply with binding international agreements and introducing regressive measures that undermine established standards of international protection. This reflects a biased approach that directly threatens the protection of refugees and asylum seekers through a systematic attack on their rights and guarantees, justified by a one-dimensional and ideological interpretation of national security. The result is a direct and unlawful infringement of the right to seek and receive asylum under the American Convention,” stated Gabriela Liguori, Executive Director of CAREF, before the authorities.
Juliana Miranda, Coordinator of the International Team at CELS, highlighted that terrorism was used as a pretext to change Argentina’s policy toward refugees. “The rights-based protection approach that previously prevailed—and had been internationally recognized by various organizations—is being replaced by one centered on ‘national security,’ as if the policy of protecting asylum seekers were a source of threats. This rationale was precisely the basis for incorporating the Ministry of Security into CONARE.”
Next, Jesuit priest Julio Villavicencio from the Jesuit Migrant Service emphasized that there is no official data to support the claim that asylum is being misused fraudulently or systematically exploited as a channel for individuals involved in criminal activities to enter Argentina. “The stigmatization of certain national groups is not only unfounded but also endangers the integrity and security of those seeking protection, in clear contradiction with Argentina’s international commitments,” he stated.
He further emphasized, “We are here because of our commitment to human dignity, particularly for those who are forced to flee their countries. That is why we want to give voice to those who have arrived in Argentina with the hope—and the legitimate right—of rebuilding their lives free from persecution, widespread violence, foreign aggression, internal conflicts, and massive human rights violations.”
The Argentine government responded defensively, avoiding responsibility and failing to provide clear answers to the technical concerns raised by civil society organizations and the Commission. Additionally, the State asserted that no legal provision obligates it to involve civil society in the regulation of laws, disregarding the significance of participatory processes that are well established in Argentina across multiple legal frameworks.
As a result, rather than implementing a serious and effective administration of asylum procedures, the State is shifting the burden of its shortcomings onto refugees and asylum seekers, violating their rights by imposing unconstitutional procedures.
The petitioner organizations called on the IACHR to urge the Argentine government to base its policies and practices on the principle of non-discrimination, to ensure broad consultative processes, and to review the recent changes to the asylum system to bring them into compliance with its international obligations. We also requested that the Commission conduct a country visit to hear directly from those affected by these policies, the organizations supporting them, and the specialized Public Defender’s Office.
CAREF | CELS | SJM Argentina