The [in]conventionality of Brazilian immigration regulation

Abstract

This article seeks to investigate the [in] conventionality of Brazilian legislation on migratory matters. The recent publication and controversy about the revoked Ordinance No. 666/2019 / MJ and its substitute No. 770/2019 / MJ, whose article aims to regulate the possibility of summary deportation of immigrants, has rekindled the debate about the unconventionality of Brazilian migration legislation, international commitments and customs. The search for a balance between the sovereign right of the State to regulate the entry of people into its territory and respect for minimum human rights is the major challenge to be faced by countries when it comes to legislation that addresses the issue of migration. Conventionality control is the mechanism recognized by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to verify the conformity of domestic law with international treaties and conventions dealing with human rights. In this sense, in view of the possibility of international accountability of the State and disrespect for minimum human rights, this study will take care to investigate the non-compliance of Brazilian legislation on migratory matters to the human rights treaties and conventions to which Brazil is a signatory. To this end, the work will address the Brazilian migration law, its adaptation to international law, as well as the flaws in its regulation, with emphasis on Decree 666/2019 and Decree 770/2019, of the Ministry of Justice. In this sense, using the bibliographic research methodology in national and international doctrine, legislation and jurisprudence, using the deductive method, we seek to demonstrate the unconventionality of Brazilian legislation with the proposed theme.