The EU’s migration package currently being prepared aims to establish common rules for migration policy after a long period of instability and unsustainability. Negotiations on the reform, which began in 2020, are currently at a decisive stage.
An urgent need for reform
According to the Commission, the goal of the new Pact on Migration and Asylum is to create a more effective and sustainable migration and asylum process, based on solidarity, responsibility and respect for human rights.
There is, without question, a pressing need to reform migration policy. Every year, huge numbers of people attempt to reach the EU via life-threatening routes. According to Helsingin Sanomat, by September 2023, 2,500 people who crossed the Mediterranean had died or gone missing while attempting to reach Europe.
Member states’ practices have varied, and responsibility for asylum seekers has not been fairly shared among them. The inability to cope with large numbers of asylum seekers has previously led to agreements that are awkward for the EU, such as those with Turkey, Tunisia and Libya — for which, for example, human rights experts have criticised the Union.
What will change?
The reform has not yet taken its final shape. In June, the Council, made up of ministers from the member states, decided on its position on the Commission’s proposal. This differs in places from Parliament’s earlier position, and representatives of Parliament and the Council will next negotiate the details of the package. If the agreement follows the Commission’s preliminary timetable, the legislation will enter into force in spring 2024.
In its current form, the agreement includes several key changes, and one aim is, for example, to make the processing of asylum applications more efficient. The idea is to collect personal data on applicants during a pre-screening stage, based on which the applicant is directed either to a stricter process at the country’s border (lasting a maximum of 12 weeks), or to a different, more flexible process. What matters is whether being granted asylum is considered likely or not.
In addition, the division of responsibility between member states will become more even. It currently looks as though, in future, in a situation where large numbers of asylum seekers arrive in Europe, every member state will either have to accept a certain number of applicants per year or pay funds into a shared EU fund. A member state receiving large numbers of asylum seekers can request support from other members, and other member states will be obliged to help.
Human rights hanging in the balance?
The aim of the reform is to strengthen the realisation of asylum seekers’ human rights and to reduce, for example, the number of deaths in the Mediterranean. However, whether the coming reform will safeguard the human dignity of asylum seekers is questionable, especially in the Council’s proposal.
The proposal would also fundamentally change the return process for those who receive negative asylum decisions. According to Politico, member states would be allowed to determine for themselves whether the country to which someone is returned meets sufficient human rights standards. The person being returned must have some connection to the return country, but even a prior period of residence there is enough to satisfy this. The prospect of return decisions being made on a fast timetable, already at the country’s border, has also drawn criticism.
Critics see this as a risk to the safety and wellbeing of those being returned — and not without reason. Joint EU decisions on the safety of each country would better safeguard the position of those who receive a negative asylum decision. Because the Council’s proposal increases asylum checks carried out at member states’ borders, many have expressed concern that the reform could also result in camps where people seeking safety are forced to live for months in inhumane conditions.
The Union must respect its own values – even when they conflict with member states’ interests
According to the EU itself, its core values include respect for human dignity and human rights, as well as the rule of law. Proposals that endanger human rights in this way put the EU’s own values awkwardly into question.
It appears that the Council’s position on the reform is clearly more problematic from a human rights perspective than Parliament’s position. It is known that, in particular, Eastern European countries are reluctant to accept asylum seekers. Looking at the Council’s proposal, however, it is clear that a willingness to sideline human rights concerns extends more broadly than that. The most problematic aspect of this equation is that, in order to serve member states’ own interests, it is people in especially vulnerable positions who may end up paying the price.
It looks worryingly likely that the agreement will end up as a lukewarm compromise between a more human-rights-minded Parliament and the member states. At best, the outcome will improve the current situation to some extent. At worst, the rights of asylum seekers will continue to go unrealised in an appropriate manner. Fortunately, negotiations between the Council and Parliament are still to come.
What remains promising, nonetheless, is that for the first time the Union is close to reaching a shared understanding on a unified migration policy. Member states appear to have learned the hard way that cooperation is needed in the face of global challenges.
Oona Vehmas, Vice President
Veera Kiiskilä, Political Officer and Equality & Environment Officer
Sources:
Politiikkaradio (podcast): https://areena.yle.fi/podcastit/1-66486920
Commission information package: https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/new-pact-migration-and-asylum_en
Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/08/eu-agrees-radical-reforms-migration-asylum-laws
Politico: https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-migration-deal-asylum-seekers-relocation/
Blog: https://reliefweb.int/report/world/migration-obsession-killing-eus-commitment-human-rights-enar
More on this topic in Tähdistö: https://tahdistolehti.fi/unkari-ja-puola-ampuvat-alas-yhteisen-kannan-muuttoliikkeesta/