President Sebastián Piñera mentioned the Migration Agreement of the United States, reinforced again this Friday The Sile decided not to keep it.
From Palacio de La Moneda, he explained that "it opposes some principles of immigration policy itself" and because it does not protect the legitimate interests of the Silent.
In detail, he identifies it three arguments basic for non-subscription.
In the first instance, he ensured that this agreement is invalid. incredible immersion movement. "It promotes informal work, which promotes indigenous immigration intake, which means it is difficult to arrest irregular people and giving pension access to non-compliance with our country's requirements, "he said.
He also said making the "difference" between migrants and refugees; and regular irregularity.
Secondly, he said that the Marrakesh Agreement "includes" new duties for the United States, such as the review of public policies and the " Encouraging new two-dimensional or regional agreements.
"Establishing the duty of the State create conditions for the economic and social development of those migrants that are losing from a unique country ", he kept up.
As a third argument, he said to limit the right of landlords of each State to decide how to protect its borders and the conditions for entry.
"Although he says that he is not obligatory, it is clear that Chile has a secret and legitimate country to accept that, enthusiastic about the spirit and content", he said.
In addition to specifying that the document is & # 39; 86 times referring to the promise of the word and 15 duties, indicated that these types of agreements create political and legal impact.
"They are used by international organizations, including courts … and trying to get legal obligations," he said.
"I can not support the text, in terms of the reasons mentioned above and after a detailed survey, I believe it is damaging and does not protect the silly things. It encourages and focuses on irregular migration, helping to promote unrecognized rights, establish new commitments and contribute limiting barriers ", convicted him.
After knowing the decision, the opponents said that it is a State case, however, Piñera did not make sure that, since they were against them, Consult them with similar topics.
"We never consulted on the immigrant policy that meant the entrance to Chile of hundreds of thousands of non-governmental immigrants"he said.
Indeed, he recognized issues between international law, such as a dispute in Hague.
Also, in terms of multi-enterprise, he said that the Government believes it, and so they are actively active; participate in each forum. "It does not mean the obligation to sign all agreements or agreements," he said.