On 23 September 2020, the European Commission presented its long-awaited proposal for the New Pact on Migration and Asylum. Two weeks after the devastating fire at the Moria refugee camp, the Commission proposed a “fresh start on migration” that focuses on increased responsibility and solidarity between member states. The new pact hopes to move away from the current stalemate, towards a predictable and reliable migration management system. Non-governmental organisations have, however, harshly criticised the Commission’s proposal, alleging that it is simply a continuation of older ideas designed to “heighten walls and strengthen fences”.
The Pact is based on three pillars, which Vice-President for Promoting our European Way of Life Margaritis Schinas described as a three-storey house: stronger cooperation with countries of origin and transit; more efficient management of external borders; and mandatory intra-EU solidarity.
COOPERATION WITH THIRD COUNTRIES
When it comes to cooperation with third countries, the Pact’s aim is to ensure mutual support in addressing migration challenges. The EU plans to use diplomatic incentives, such as financial rewards or visa allocations, to cooperate with third countries to curtail migration flows to Europe.
Human rights organisations have expressed their disappointment towards this policy. They claim it is a continuation of past policies that focused on reinforcing border management control and preventing people from reaching Europe. NGOs and international institutions urge the EU to provide safe and legal channels so that people seeking international protection can safely reach Europe without relying on smugglers.
SPEEDY PROCEDURES AT EXTERNAL BORDERS
The second pillar of the Pact aims at speeding screenings at the external borders to avoid overcrowding and more Moria-like camps. Within five days of arrival, migrants will be split into groups on the basis of their country of origin. Those coming from countries with an asylum recognition rate lower than 20%, thus viewed as highly unlikely to receive asylum, will be put into a “fast track” border procedure that should deliver a decision on their asylum application within 12 weeks. Those viewed as more likely to receive asylum will instead enjoy a full hearing.
Experts and Civil Society Organisations have expressed their concerns over this new speedy screening as it risks leaving migrants with fewer procedural guarantees. This may result in quickly dismissing asylum applications, and returning individuals back to where their lives are in danger. The International Rescue Committee stressed that the “need for speed must not overshadow the need for a fair and full asylum process”.
À LA CARTE SOLIDARITY
The Pact’s ground-breaking proposal is to allow EU countries that are reluctant to take in migrants to contribute to the migration policy in other ways. Such countries will be able to avoid relocating migrants by facilitating the return of migrants who do not qualify for asylum or by providing logistical support at the external borders.
This proposal has been met with fierce criticism from NGOs, experts, and member states alike. International think-tank European Council of Foreign Affairs argues that allowing anti-migration governments to oversee deportation is a risky affair. For their part, Spanish and Greek authorities have stressed that this proposal fails to alleviate the heavy burden they face as entry countries. On the other spectrum, Slovenia has criticised the mandatory nature of this proposal.
On a more positive note, NGOs have acknowledged several positive aspects of the Pact, such as the decriminalisation of sea rescue attempts, the addition of provisions to protect child and family unity, and the proposal to reduce the time period for refugees to be eligible for long term legal status.
The New Pact on Migration and Asylum will now have to be negotiated within the European Parliament and the Council of the EU. Policy experts anticipate this process will spark heated debates.
Almudena holds a MA in Human Rights Law at SOAS, University of London and has experience working for human rights organisations in Spain. She is especially interested in International Refugee and Migration Law, democracy promotion, freedom of speech and gender-based violence issues. She hopes to work at a human rights advocacy organisation.