Ambiguity in the terminological use of asylum and refuge in the Latin America and the Caribbean region

Abstract

Currently human mobility is increasing, especially driven by reasons that push them to involuntarily migrate through the region, reasons such as the generalized and systematic violence of the Central American countries, the acute crisis of the countries of the region, currently Venezuela , Argentina, Nicaragua, among others, climate change, among other causes, added to this, international refugees from the war in Syria.
A human tragedy of unprecedented magnitude, which gives rise to the frequent use of legal institutes of international protection, asylum and refuge, used interchangeably and often imprecisely and even confused, especially in the Latin American and Caribbean region. In Latin America and the Caribbean, depending on the country or the regional regulation in question, both terms are used inaccurately or in synonyms in their domestic legislation, something that is erroneous and that is intended to be evidenced in this work or to conclude with proposals for terminological unification and differentiation of both legal protection figures.
Different legislations of Latin American countries and regional legislation are analyzed, as is the case of the Brazil Action Plan, highlighting its inaccuracy. The two advisory opinions of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, OC-21/14, the Pacheco Tineo Family case against the Plurinational State of Bolivia of November 25, 2013, which deals with a pronounced inaccuracy in both institutes when trying to define asylum are also exposed. When in reality it is about refuge. And the last advisory opinion OC-28/18 at the request of the Republic of Ecuador where the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, tries to find a conceptualization and differentiation of both institutes through an integrating and enlightening classification of the functions of both institutes.