The EU Pact on Migration

The Pact on migration and asylum is a set of new rules managing migration and establishing a common asylum system at EU level. After three years of negotiations, the European Commission Pact on Migration and Asylum delivered its reforms which intend to mark a fresh start for EU asylum and migration policy.

What legislation does the Pact on Migration and Asylum entail?

The Pact on Migration and Asylum was presented by the Commission in September 2020. Alongside non-legislative initiatives, the Pact represents a fresh start on managing migration. Over three years later, the European Parliament and the Council reached political agreement on 5 of the key files in a historic breakthrough. In total, 10 new legislative texts have now been adopted by the European Parliament. Together, the set of reforms will establish a new legal foundation for what is claimed to be a fairer and more efficient way of managing migration.

Criticism of the pact has come from all angles including from Poland and Hungary. The Polish Prime Minister said that he will protect Poland against relocation mechanisms, whilst Hungary has also expressed their discontent. Hungary has insisted that the country would speak loudly against the new pact arguing that it does not take into account the Hungarian experience and is doomed to fail.

What will the Pact change?

The Pact creates a?common European system?that sets up a new process for managing migration in normal times, while also catering for crisis situations and instrumentalization. The rationale of a common European system to control EU external borders is to ensure fairness between Member States whilst still protecting people in need.

What risks do the new laws pose?

1.??? Rights violations during fast-tracked asylum procedures

Under the Pact, many more asylum seekers will be subjected to?fast-tracked?asylum and return (deportation) procedures. Accelerated, substandard procedures at the border will be widely used, and people will face short time frames for interviews, limited or no access to legal advice, inadequate assessments of their vulnerability, and obstacles to appealing the decisions made in their cases.

Those who travelled through so-called “safe countries” before reaching Europe — such as Tunisia, Egypt, or Turkey — can have their claim discarded without any assessment of the individual persecution they face. They?risk?being returned to those countries, where they may face human rights abuses or be deported to their own countries where they may suffer harm or death.

2.??? A massive increase in detention of asylum seekers across Europe

The new laws require large-scale “screening” and processing of asylum seekers in facilities at borders. Various categories of asylum seekers will then be held in?closed facilities?at borders for up to 12 weeks while their claim is being assessed. During this time, asylum seekers would be deemed?legally?to not be on EU soil — despite being physically present — increasing the risk that they will be denied access to rights and services. People can then be?detained?for a further 12 weeks if their claim is rejected. In reality, they are likely to be detained much longer as countries of origin are often unwilling or unable to take back their nationals, preventing quick deportation. Extended?detention, with limited access to legal assistance, contravenes European and international law.

3.??? Border states continue to be disproportionately responsible for asylum seekers

Currently, the EU state upon which an asylum seeker first sets foot, is, in most cases,?responsible?for hosting them and assessing their claim. This has placed a disproportionate burden on states at the borders, incentivizing them to conduct illegal pushbacks and ignore boats in distress. These responsibility?rules, which have generated?dire?humanitarian conditions at borders, are maintained in the Pact. Yet new screening and detention at borders will further increase the pressure on border states. A “solidarity mechanism” is introduced to offset this imbalance. States that are not facing migratory pressure can choose to either provide funding — to states at the border or to countries outside the EU — or they can relocate and host asylum applicants. As relocations are politically unpopular, the new mechanism is unlikely to lead to a fairer distribution of asylum seekers across the EU. Further, while the “solidarity funds” can be used to improve living conditions, they may also be used to build prison-like detention centres at borders or to fund migration control outside the EU.

4.??? Rights violations due to emergency measures for crises

At times of high numbers of arrivals, states will be able to delay the registration of asylum seekers, channel them through fast-tracked and substandard procedures, and detain them for longer periods. Emergency?measures, which reduce human rights safeguards, can also be used when states claim that “instrumentalization” is taking place. Instrumentalization broadly describes any situation in which people seeking protection are manipulated by “hostile actors”: this vague definition leaves the concept open to political interpretations that undermine the right to seek asylum.

New screening and detention at borders will further increase the pressure on border states.

Are there positive elements of the Pact?

Though most changes introduced by the Pact erode the rights of asylum seekers, certain aspects could offer opportunities to protect refugees. New rights monitoring mechanisms will be introduced during processing at the border. A new resettlement framework could open up more?safe routes?to Europe, if it results in states increasing their resettlement pledges.

?

?

?

?