The Fiction of Non-Entry in South American Airports: Evidence from Brazil, Chile, and Ecuador

Abstract [En]: This article analyses the “non-entry fiction” in Brazilian, Chilean, and Ecuadorian airports, revealing a stark contrast between generous legal frameworks and restrictive border practices. It shows how transit zones become legal exceptions designed to bypass non-refoulement obligations. Ultimately, the study warns that normalizing this differentiated legality strips the right to international protection of its core meaning.

Titolo: La finzione di non-ingresso negli aeroporti sudamericani: evidenze dal Brasile, dal Cile e dall’Ecuador

Abstract [It]: L’articolo analizza la “finzione di non ingresso” negli aeroporti brasiliani, cileni ed ecuadoriani, rivelando un forte contrasto tra quadri normativi generosi e pratiche di frontiera restrittive. Lo studio mostra come le zone di transito diventino eccezioni giuridiche progettate per eludere gli obblighi di non-refoulement. In definitiva, l’analisi avverte che la normalizzazione di questa legalità differenziata svuota il diritto alla protezione internazionale del suo significato essenziale.

Keywords: Fiction of non-entry, Airport transit zones, Asylum, South America, Non-refoulement

Parole chiave: Finzione di non-ingresso, Zone di transito aeroportuale, Asilo, Sud America, Non respingimento

Table of contents: 1. Introduction. 2. The “Fiction of Non-Entry” in Airport Transit Zones. 2.1. The Globalization of this Fiction. 2.2. The Manifestly Unfounded Standard and the Politics of Credibility. 2.3. The Production of the Inadmissible Subject and Comparative Judicial Challenges. 3. The Incompatibility of the Fiction of Non-Entry with Inter-American Standards. 3.1. Non-Refoulement as a Non-Derogable Obligation. 4. Chile: From Administrative Arbitrariness to Judicial Protection. 4.1.  Inadmissibility to the Territory as a Barrier. 4.2. The Supreme Court as Guarantor of Asylum Access. 5. Ecuador: From Administrative Exclusion to Constitutional Oversight. 5.1. Inadmissibility as Sovereign Prerogative. 5.2. The Constitutional Shift: Ruling No. 1214-18-EP/22. 6. Brazil: From Statutory Protection to the Judicial Consolidation of Restriction. 6.1. The Conflict Between Lex Specialis and Migration Control. 6.2. The Consolidation of the Barrier for Transit Travelers. 7. Discussing findings: The Normalization of Differential Legality. 8. Conclusion: Non-Entry Fiction as a Threat to the Regional Asylum Regime.