According to the National Audit Office (AGN), controlling the transit of people within the country's borders is a "very significant factor": only 42 border crossings of the 234 existing ones use the computer system with which the Directorate operates National Migrations.
According to the work, drawn up from 2007 to May 2008 and approved this year, the rest of the borders are handled with the National Gendarmerie Background System, or it is not computerized, which means that surveillance is done manually. The AGN stressed the need to "proceed to the computerization of the enabled steps, taking into account that the control of restrictions is impossible with manual procedures", and recommended "making compatible" Migration and Gendarmerie databases to achieve the "adequate Compliance with the registration of persons entering or leaving the country."
The National Directorate of Migration is a decentralized entity that operates under the aegis of the Ministry of the Interior. In this report, the Audit analyzed the work of two directions: the Admission of Foreigners and the Immigration Control. At the time of approval of the investigation, the control body gave the "reserved character" to several of its observations, since it was "information concerning internal security".
The Admission of Foreigners sector resolves filing procedures. Among the non-reserved observations, the AGN points out a difference between the headquarters of the office and the delegations of the interior. It is that in the metropolitan area there is a computerized circuit and the operations last an average of two days, whereas in the provinces the admissions are carried out manually and then they are reported through Internet. In the latter case, the report argues that "the mechanism used does not have a specific frequency, nor have there been any controls to ensure the integrity of the transmission of eradications at any given time", is redundancy. For its part, the Directorate of Migration itself reported that this was remedied from the implementation of a system called "samex". Auditors clarify that, as the use of samex was subsequent to their investigation, "the situation should be verified in future follow-up work." That is, it will be necessary to wait for a new analysis of the AGN to know the effectiveness of the mechanism.
But the work of the delegations from the interior deserved another wake-up call. "It is observed with respect to proceedings initiated, a low amount of establishments resolved in the same year (in which) they were presented," says the report, adding that in 2007 initiated the establishment-process relationship was resolved 65.5% while, at the headquarters, the level of effectiveness amounted to 94.6% for the same period.
Moreover, not every office has the same rigor. According to the AGN, there was a request for establishment of a Brazilian citizen who was rejected by the delegation of La Plata, until the person concerned did not provide certification records issued by the country from which they entered (in this case it was Ecuador) , And a response from Interpol was obtained. But, "the delegation of Salta authorized the establishment without adding these background checks."
In fact, the auditors found that "in all the cases of eradication analyzed, even though there is existing background a request to Interpol, the admission procedure is approved without the response of the police agency." In their defense, Migration said on the one hand, it agreed with Interpol written report that only when the foreigner who wants to enter the country recorded history, by the impossibility to respond to all requests; And, on the other, which coincides with the sense of observation of the AGN and that "the study will focus on a different mechanism to document this type of work. "Within the Directorate of Admission of Foreigners also operates an area for the Patria Grande Program, which seeks to regularize the situation of immigrants, natives of Mercosur and associated countries without legal documentation to reside in the country. The initiative is carried out through the intermediary of 596 partner institutions, based on their specific activity in foreign and neighborhood communities, capture those interested in catching up with their roles.
The problem, says the audit, was that "complaints about the activity of various collaborating institutions that caused the loss of empowerment in several cases occurred." In addition, a limitation arises: Patria Grande "does not provide for registration of complaints made in order to identify which associations are reported and whether they are being investigated," the report added.
Also, "there were collaborating institutions that had lots of paperwork filing solved, but without notifying the stakeholders." Since the coordination of the Patria Grande Program, they explained to the AGN that every month they delivered an envelope to each institution with favorable responses to requests for filing, for which the relevant notices are given. Similarly, the Watchdog listed in which the notification and eradication procedures completed are "very low": The Municipality of Berazategui, nine out of 820; Municipality of Moreno, 476 over 1.078; The NGO Our Refuge Satellite II, also of Moreno, only one case of 242.
Therefore, the Directorate of Immigration responded to the audit, first, that "notifications are no longer the responsibility of the collaborating institutions" and, second, that it carried out the steps of procedures of filing. Again, and the AGN's report says "the above situation should be the subject of a follow-up study."