Venezuelan migrants in Colombia: Court eases requirements for requesting Temporary Protection Permits

Thanks to the tutela filed by seven Venezuelan migrants in Colombia before the Constitutional Court, and the report presented by Judge Diana Fajardo, this judicial entity ruled in favor of the Venezuelan citizens. The Court determined that Migration must refrain from demanding the condition of not having ongoing administrative immigration investigations or police proceedings.

“Migration Colombia must refrain from demanding as a requirement to grant the Temporary Protection Permit [PPT] to persons with Venezuelan nationality, the condition of not having ongoing administrative immigration investigations originating in their irregular entry into the country”, said the Constitutional Court.

You may be interested in: SENA opens new call to study for free in Colombia

The fact, which resulted in Ruling T-100 of 2023, arose after the aforementioned persons, who entered the country in an irregular migration condition, requested information from Migración Colombia to begin the process of migratory regularization, which includes the procedures to request the Temporary Protection Permit (PPT).

Instead of obtaining information on migratory regularization, Venezuelan migrants in Colombia were subject to a migratory sanction procedure for their irregular entry and stay in our country.

According to the bulletin of the Constitutional Court, Migration Colombia initiated the procedure to prevent Venezuelan migrants in Colombia from accessing the Temporary Protection Permit they requested and, therefore, the protection of several fundamental rights.

Faced with the demands of Migración Colombia, the Venezuelan migrants in Colombia explained that, due to the situation that the neighboring country is going through, they were unable to process a passport or document that would allow them to enter our country through an official border post.

Likewise, they assured the judicial authority that the administrative processes carried out by Migration against them were illegitimate and could lead to their expulsion from the country.

You may also be interested in: Unions announce teachers’ strike over upcoming FOMAG contract decision

These are the requirements that Migration Colombia will no longer be able to demand from irregular migrants to apply for the PPT.

In Ruling T-100 of 2023, the Constitutional Court assures that, due to the situation of vulnerability faced by Venezuelan citizens when crossing the border to enter our country, it is disproportionate for Migración Colombia to require them not to have ongoing administrative immigration investigations in order to obtain the Temporary Protection Permit.

The Court emphasized that this requirement creates restrictions to ensure their rights to work, education, health and social security in pension matters, so that their rights may be violated.

With this, all persons who are in the same situation as the plaintiffs will be covered by the ruling until the investigations they have underway for reasons related to their irregular entry into the country are not resolved.

“The requirement for the granting of the Temporary Protection Permit, consisting of not having ongoing administrative immigration investigations, is contrary to the Constitution, since the measure does not pass a strict proportionality test”, reads the ruling of the Constitutional Court.

Ruling T-100 of 2023 of the Constitutional Court in favor of Venezuelan migrants in Colombia

The process in the Constitutional Court began with the petitioners’ request for protection of due process, family unity and the right to asylum. In the first and second instance, the judges granted partial relief in relation to the right to petition. However, regarding the alleged violation of due process, the judges did not rule in favor.

Throughout the development of the tutela, the Third Chamber of Review heard the case. And, finally, Judge Diana Fajardo drafted a ruling that granted five of the seven Venezuelan migrants in Colombia who filed the tutela, the right to due process.

The argumentation was based on the affectation presented by the plaintiffs due to the inadequate notification of the actions in the sanctioning processes of migratory nature, the lack of opportunity to be heard, the lack of respect for the guarantee of a reasonable time to exercise the right to contradict and the absence of free legal representation.

Keep reading: The VAT refund will be up to $240,000: this is how the next transfer will be made