Being forever stuck in the asylum queue or progressing with temporary protection: is South America approaching the end of asylum?

仅在南美洲大陆就有500多万委内瑞拉人（R4V，2022）跨境流动，这对现有的保护途径提出了重大的法律的、政治和社会挑战。解决委内瑞拉人流动性的新的临时机制的出现，使他们的庇护申请重新转向其他临时移民措施（R4V，2022年），即使其中一些人可能需要国际保护。虽然欧洲的决策者和学者可能对这种转变很熟悉，但在南美洲，处理混合流动的临时机制是最近才出现的，正在产生独特的转变，与欧洲背景下研究的情况既相似又不同。拟议的专题具有创新性，因为它分析了南美洲从一种制度到另一种制度的发展，将国家和政策反应以及个别国家的情况结合起来。最近的学者文献还没有提到委内瑞拉混合移民的案例研究，作为庇护和移民制度之间的这种紧张关系以及随后从一个到另一个的转变的范例。有了这个差距，本研究提案将制定以下问题：当代法律的和政策的实践，在南美洲，委内瑞拉在该地区的跨境流动性，信号结束庇护的做法，因为学术概念理解它？从一种制度过渡到另一种制度的影响可分为两种办法。在自上而下的层面上，这可能与庇护作为国家建立和执行的法律的制度受到侵蚀以及随后被其他国内和临时措施所取代有关。它还表明，非公民如何被视为“移民”，是适用于希望在第三国居住的人的唯一类别。从自下而上的角度来看，这一进展可能表明，庇护作为一种法律的保护形式正在变得模糊，这种保护形式旨在为在原籍国遭受迫害和其他形式暴力的个人提供长期居留计划。研究这种新的范式变化将有助于两个层次。一方面，它使人们能够理解，其他大陆正在取代庇护政策，转向实用和临时的机制，使庇护作为一个法律的保护类别变得模糊。另一方面，这将有助于分析对非公民的影响，他们在临时机制中找到了一个虽小但重要的空间，可以抵制法律的模糊性，并在国家提供的移徙可能性下建设未来。

The cross-border movement of over 5 million Venezuelans (R4V, 2022) only in the South American continent has surfaced significant legal, political, and social challenges to extant paths for protection. The emergence of new temporary mechanisms to address Venezuelan mobility has reconducted their claims from asylum to other temporary migratory measures (R4V, 2022) even when some of them may have international protection needs. While such shifts may appear familiar to policymakers and scholars in Europe, in South America, temporary mechanisms to address mixed movements are recent and are producing unique transformations that are both similar and different to what has been studied in the European context. The proposed topic is innovative since it analyses the progression from one system to another in South America integrating both the States and policy responses and the individual contestation. Recent scholar literary has not addressed yet the Venezuelan case study of mixed migration as a paradigm of this tension between the asylum and the migratory system and the subsequent shift from one to another. With this gap, this research proposal will formulate the following question: Does the contemporary legal and policy praxis in South America, resulting from Venezuelan cross-border mobility in the region, signal an end of asylum practice as the scholarly conception understands it? The implications of the transition from one system to another might be divided into two approaches. At the top-down level, it could be associated with the erosion of asylum as a legal institution created and enforced by States and its subsequent replacement with other domestic and temporary measures. It also demonstrates how the non-citizen is perceived as a "migrant" as the only category applicable to those who aspire to reside in a third country. On a bottom-up approach, the progression might indicate asylum is blurring as a legal protection form orientated to bring long-term residence schemes to individuals who experience persecution and other kinds of violence in their country of origin. Studying this new change of paradigm will contribute to two tiers. On the one hand, it enables understanding that other continents are replacing asylum policies towards pragmatic and temporary mechanisms, blurring asylum as a legal protection category. On the other hand, it will help to analyse the impact on the non-citizen, who find in the temporary mechanisms a small but significant space to resist the legal ambiguity and build a future with the migratory possibilities offered by States.