By Rachele Vannini
“History made. We have delivered a robust legislative framework on how to deal with migration and asylum in the EU.” These are the words written on X by Roberta Metsola, the European Parliament’s president, on April 10th, 2024, after the EP adopted the law package aimed at reforming the EU’s migration and asylum system. It’s inevitable to notice that this, so-called, achievement arrives two months before the EU 2024 elections, and, secret revealed, it is not by chance. Indeed, it comes after years of deep crisis concerning migration handling by the EU and, even more important, this topic has been playing an influential role in shaping European political discourse and public opinion.
The making of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum
The “refugee-crisis” of 2015 brought to surface the deficiencies of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), that is the policy framework developed to ensure the equal treatment of asylum seekers under EU’s jurisdiction. In particular, the Dublin regulation, that is the cornerstone of CEAS, put an enormous burden on few EU member states, as it determines that an asylum claim must be processed by the country of first entry, thus charging few member States with external borders to process most of the asylum claims submitted. At that time, it became clear that reforms of the system were necessary to overcome this struggle and to guarantee a more adequate management of migration.
On the wave of this spreading feeling, the European Commission first presented reform proposals in 2016, but this only opened the way to almost a decade of complex negotiations between the European institutions and member states.
The first concrete outcome arrived in September 2020, when the Commission finally proposed the New Pact on Migration and Asylum with the aim of providing improved and faster procedures throughout the European asylum system. Ursula Von der Layen, president of the Commission, commented it: “It is now time to rise to the challenge to manage migration jointly, with the right balance between solidarity and responsibility”.
However, the game was not closed and the race was still on, as it was not until December 2023 that a political agreement on the New Pact was reached between the European Parliament and the Council, in what has been called an “historical decision” by President Metsola.
Last step has been taken on Wednesday, April 10th, 2024, when MEPs endorsed this agreement and voted in favour of it during the plenary session of the Parliament. Despite previous optimism, the law package passed with a smaller margin than expected, on average of 300 votes in favour and 270 against, because of the dissent between and within the political groups.
“Today is indeed a historic day. After years of intense work, the Pact on Migration and Asylum becomes a reality. It is a huge achievement for Europe.” von der Leyen told reporters during the following press conference. “Migration is a European challenge which must be met with a European solution. One that is effective, and both fair and firm. This is what the Pact delivers. It will be making a real difference for all Europeans” she continued.
On the other hand, this adoption has been fiercely criticised by Eve Geddie, Amnesty International’s Head of the European Institutions Office, who stated: “Europe has missed a vital opportunity to build a migration and asylum system that places human rights at the centre, and to unconditionally uphold people’s human right to seek asylum no matter where they come from or how they have arrived”.
If truth lies in the middle, to understand these positions, it’s necessary to look at the features and then the controversies characterising this new Pact.
What are the main features of the Pact?
The New Pact was developed to reform and put together all the aspects of migration management at the European level, at least that’s what the European Commission sustains. Adopting this perspective, it contains more than five legislative texts, aimed at creating a comprehensive system, based on three main pillars, as outlined by von der Layen during the press conference on April 10th.
“First, more secure European borders”. This will be reached by registering and screening everyone, through the improvement of the Eurodac database.
“Second, faster, more efficient procedures for asylum and return”. This means that mandatory border procedures are introduced to boost the recognition of those with the right to asylum and to track illegal migration. In practice, there will be the traditional asylum procedure, which usually takes several months or, more frequently, years to complete. And a fast-tracked border procedure, lasting a maximum of 12 weeks, at least on paper, during which these migrants will not be allowed to enter the national territory and instead will be kept at hubs on the border.
“And third, more solidarity with the Member States at EU external borders”. The Pact tries to establish a system of ‘compulsory solidarity’ between all member States, which, however, can choose how best to do it. It means that they can contribute through choosing to relocate a certain number of asylum seekers, pay a contribution for each asylum seeker they do not relocate, or giving financial operational support.
Another important element is the objective of strengthening partnerships with third countries, to create safe and legal channels to Europe, to manage repatriations and to help local development.
…But what are the controversies?
Thus, as we can see, policy makers presented the New Pact as a tool created “to manage and normalise migration for the long term, providing certainty, clarity and decent conditions for people arriving in the EU”, but reality of facts is quite different.
There are plenty of reasons to stand against this package of new rules, as also argued by numerous NGOs and migration policy experts.
The paradox is that it doesn’t alter the Dublin principle of ‘first country of enter’, which remains but it’s sided by the so-called ‘solidarity system’. The problem is the flexibility of this mechanism, as mentioned above, which is not going to guarantee a fairer share of burden among the member States.
The main concern is represented by the fast-track border procedure, which is likely leading to violations of the right to claim asylum. One of the problems is the basic assumption that asylum claims can be processed very fast at the border, but there’s nothing more wrong than that, as the processing of asylum applications takes several months or even years. In addition, this new procedure provides the detention of rejected asylum seekers within border facilities to speed up repatriations. This is quite alarming as it will probably lead to violation of human rights and it can encourage systematic and large-scale detention, as witnessed by the previous fast track procedure adopted with the EU-Turkey agreement of 2016.
Another controversial element is that the EU is clearly adopting the strategy of externalisation of borders, because the Pact establishes the idea of concluding tailored agreements with third countries, to shift responsibility for refugee protection and border controls to third countries.
What’s the impact of migration issues on EU upcoming elections?
As stated at the beginning, it’s important to highlight the time this decision has been taken: we were two months apart from the June elections.
This reform has been one of the cornerstones of the 2019-2024 term of the Commission and EP, which succeeded in reaching their goal. Unofficially, it was said that this agreement on migration and asylum policy was necessary to slow down the course of right-wing populists that are alarming centre-left actors. At the same time, conservatives tried to delay the agreement with the aim of discussing it within the next EP configuration, which is expected to be more oriented with their positions about migration.
Giving a close look, the European political landscape has been quite divided on this New Pact, for different reasons, based on the ideological beliefs.
The Centre-right European People’s Party (EPP), the largest political group, is mainly in favour of the Pact as “it will allow to regain control over EU external borders and reduce pressure on the EU” the EPP leader Manfred Weber stated. The socialists belonging to Socialists&Democrats (S&D) and liberals of Renew expressed general support. Meanwhile, the Greens and the Left are concerned about fundamental rights issues, but they also claimed that rejecting this Pact would have caused an easy-win to the far-right. On the far-right side, the Pact is considered, obviously, too weak.
This fragmentation, between and within political groups, explains why the adoption on April 10th happened with a smaller majority than expected, reached especially thanks to abstentions. However, the result allows mainstream European political parties to expose the reform in their electoral campaign, believing it can show citizens that “the EU delivers”.
Now, what is still at stake is the European voters’ attitude towards the migration topic, as they are called to vote to elect their next representatives at the EU level.
A poll conducted by Ipsos and published by Euronews shows that 51% of Europeans do not support EU migration policy, while only 16% have a positive view and 32% are indifferent. But most importantly, when looking at the voting intention, those who have a negative view intend to vote for far-right parties and conservative ones. These European citizens are also the most likely to call for improved border controls. Furthermore, looking through the country’s lens, Poland (86%), Bulgaria (83%) and Finland (83%) are those asking stricter management of migration, while Italy’s (39%) and Spain’s (41%) citizens showed to be more welcoming towards migrants.
To conclude, 59% of respondents said that the EU should make the fight against irregular migration a priority, while 29% said it should be “important but not a priority” and just 12% concluded it should be “secondary.”
What to expect from now on?
The New Pact on Migration and Asylum will have the green light if the Council adopts it, when called to vote on April 29th via qualified majority. Then, it will take at least two years before its implementation takes place, expected in 2026.
The Pact, as it is today, isn’t going to solve the pressing problems of the migration management by the EU or to improve protection of asylum seekers. What we can expect is ineffectiveness and chaos caused by this new migration and asylum system, that still lacks fair, humane and effective procedures that are needed to respect human rights of people on the move. What is truly necessary is a well-resourced, long-term, and sustainable response to ensure the right to migrate.
In the meantime, once again, what we are facing is a European Union even more entrenched behind its borders, standing in contraction to EU’s funding values.