The Government resorts to the Supreme Order of receiving a thousand unaccompanied asylum applicants in the Canary Islands | Spain

The central government and that of the Canary Islands gathered this Thursday to respond to the recent car of the Supreme Court that forced more than 1,000 unaccompanied migrants They have requested asylum they go to the national reception system. But, waiting for a consensus solution, the Central Executive has resorted to the resolution of the High Court and has requested the suspension of the 10 -day period given by the magistrates to take care of those minors that are currently under the umbrella of the Canary Islands Protection Services. In the appeal, to which the country has had access, the State Advocacy defends that the Canarian Autonomic Administration is competent in the subject of migrant minors or not applicants for international protection. According to the Government, abide by the ruling and refer to those minors to the resources of the State would result « to the detriment of the best interests of the child. »

The precautionary measure agreed on March 25 by the Supreme Court to host the more than 1,000 unaccompanied minors (1,221 according to UNHCR data) found in the reception services of the Canary Islands and who have requested asylum or officially manifested their willingness to request it. The judges admit that, on this matter, there is a crossing of powers of both administrations, state and autonomous: in their status as “in obvious situation of helplessness” it is the Autonomous Community that must take charge, but “when the circumstance of having submitted a request for asylum is added to its condition as a minor”, ​​the legislation on this matter, which corresponds to the State, comes into action. The magistrates assume that the reception of these minors requires the collaboration of both administrations, but consider that the current situation is “unsustainable”, so they chose to agree as a precautionary measure the immediate access to the state -owned reception system for asylum applicants.

The State Advocacy disagrees with the thesis of the Supreme Court because, he assures, contravenes the constitutional doctrine, the general principle of the primacy of the best interests of the minor and is contrary to the right of asylum, since the regulations specifically establish that the minors applicants have the right to be treated “differently and specificly to their situation” and sends their management to the autonomous communities competent in the field of minors.

The Government recalls that article 48 of the Regulatory Law of Asylum, 2009notes that unaccompanied minors applicants for international protection will be referred to the competent services in minors protection. « It is, therefore, Law 12/2009 that states that international protection applicants who are unaccompanied should be referred to the competent services in the field of minors protection, which are the autonomous communities, leading to the reverse conclusion to that established in the contested order, » the law warns.

The brief presented by the legal representative of the Government also argues that the references made to the minors in the decree of 2022 by which the regulation is approved that regulates the reception system in the field of international protection, are oriented to minors accompanied by their families and not to unaccompanied minors. This circumstance, warns the law, translates into the fact that the resources of the international protection reception system « are not designed or have the human and material means to serve unaccompanied minor people, which also necessarily results in detriment of the best interests of the child. »

The Government also rejects that, as the Supreme maintains, before the crossing of powers on these minors, the State must prevail. The law invokes the doctrine of the Constitutional Court that establishes that, in the case of concurrence of powers in which the collaboration of the two administrations is not possible, the exercise of the competence “to the holder of which it prevails in each case”. And, in this case, the prevailing competition is the one that has Canary Islands on unaccompanied migrants. The Executive argues that the minors applicants for international protection have “double status” entitled that confers them the fact of being less and the fact of being asylum seekers. « However, the one that must be prioritized, because it is in addition to its best interest, is to be less, » says the law, which features that, when the right of a minor asylum seeker to the material reception has to be guaranteed, « said reception must be provided differently, specificly and adapted to the status of minor. » « Therefore, if the concept of minor prevails over the asylum applicant and on any other consideration as a foreigner, it is clear that the prevailing competition is related to the protection of minors. This means that in cases of minors it is the CCAA who must exercise the competition, » concludes the law.