A New Pact on Migration and Asylum: What Changes for Responsibility-Sharing in the European Union?

After more than three years of nego­tia­ti­ons and just befo­re the upco­m­ing elec­tions of the Euro­pean Par­lia­ment, the Euro­pean Uni­on (EU) reached a pro­vi­sio­nal agree­ment on a new migra­ti­on deal. Hai­led as a his­to­ric agree­ment that will over­haul the EU’s migra­ti­on and asyl­um poli­cy frame­work, how would this deal chan­ge the sys­tem of respon­si­bi­li­ty-sharing, and will it estab­lish the long-awai­ted soli­da­ri­ty bet­ween mem­ber states?

The new deal that was agreed in princip­le in Decem­ber 2023 seeks to address a per­sis­tent pro­blem: the Com­mon Euro­pean Asyl­um Sys­tem is lar­ge­ly dys­func­tio­n­al and refu­gee arri­vals are high­ly asym­metric among mem­ber sta­tes, with them showing litt­le appe­ti­te for more soli­da­ri­ty. In the cur­rent sys­tem, respon­si­bi­li­ty for an asyl­um request is assi­gned pri­ma­ri­ly to the coun­try of first ent­ry, most­ly the front­li­ne coun­tries in Sou­thern Euro­pe. Nume­rous attempts to estab­lish a fair(er) sharing of respon­si­bi­li­ties fai­led eit­her to reach a poli­ti­cal agree­ment or to be effec­tively imple­men­ted due to non-com­pli­an­ce by mem­ber sta­tes and asyl­um-see­kers. Des­pi­te a broad con­sen­sus on the need for reform, the EU has hither­to fai­led to find a poli­ti­cal solu­ti­on that would recon­ci­le the asym­metric inte­rests of mem­ber sta­tes and estab­lish effec­ti­ve responsibility-sharing.

The New Pact on Migra­ti­on and Asyl­um is the latest attempt to address this chal­len­ge. While the tech­ni­cal details are still under work, the for­mal appro­val is expec­ted this spring as a strong signal to Euro­pean voters that the EU is capa­ble of effec­ti­ve poli­ti­cal action on this cru­cial issue that is loo­m­ing lar­ge in the upco­m­ing elec­tions of the Euro­pean Par­lia­ment. The legis­la­ti­ve packa­ge agreed upon in princip­le focu­ses on several key deve­lo­p­ments, name­ly the rein­for­ce­ment of exter­nal bor­ders, the modi­fi­ca­ti­on of respon­si­bi­li­ty rules, the inclu­si­on of man­da­to­ry soli­da­ri­ty pro­vi­si­ons, and the har­mo­niz­a­ti­on of pro­ce­du­ral arran­ge­ments to hand­le and pro­cess arri­vals at the bor­der and asyl­um app­li­ca­ti­ons (see over­view in the figu­re below).

Figu­re: Alix d’Agostino, DeFacto

New Foundation or Just Another Layer?

A lar­ge part of the New Pact is con­cer­ned with a bet­ter dis­tri­bu­ti­on of respon­si­bi­li­ties among mem­ber sta­tes in enfor­cing EU migra­ti­on poli­ci­es. This invol­ves a num­ber of new mea­su­res and rules that seek to ope­ra­tio­na­li­ze soli­da­ri­ty bet­ween mem­ber sta­tes and ther­eby con­tri­bu­te to fai­rer responsibility-sharing.

So far, the Com­mis­si­on insis­ted that a com­mon Euro­pean asyl­um poli­cy should invol­ve man­da­to­ry relo­ca­ti­on quo­tas, an idea that cau­sed signi­fi­cant poli­ti­cal back­lash and resul­ted in infrin­ge­ments by several mem­ber sta­tes. In con­trast, the New Pact aban­dons such a fixed obli­ga­ti­on by allowing for addi­tio­nal ways in which mem­ber sta­tes can share respon­si­bi­li­ty, name­ly the sharing of resour­ces through finan­cial and capa­ci­ty-buil­ding con­tri­bu­ti­ons. At the same time, the EU seeks to streng­t­hen the sharing of norms, i.e., efforts to har­mo­ni­ze migra­ti­on and asyl­um poli­ci­es to disin­cen­ti­vi­ze secon­da­ry move­ments and “asyl­um-shop­ping.” This takes place by tur­ning the Direc­ti­ves into more bin­ding Regu­la­ti­ons and the stan­dar­di­z­a­ti­on of pro­ce­du­res throughout the EU, lea­ving less lee­way to mem­ber states.

Final­ly, respon­si­bi­li­ty-sharing is not con­fi­ned to the pro­vi­si­on of refu­gee pro­tec­tion any­mo­re but is com­bi­ned with the objec­ti­ve of migra­ti­on manage­ment. The New Pact blurs the lines bet­ween refu­gee pro­tec­tion and immi­gra­ti­on enfor­ce­ment by stream­li­ning pro­ce­du­res that were ori­gi­nal­ly kept sepa­ra­te, like the hand­ling of an asyl­um claim and a return pro­ce­du­re. In prac­ti­ce, this means that coun­tries can con­tri­bu­te to Euro­pean soli­da­ri­ty not only by pled­ging relo­ca­ti­ons wit­hin the EU but also by fun­ding capa­ci­ty-buil­ding mea­su­res to assist other mem­ber sta­tes. The new bor­der pro­ce­du­res, that cover every aspect of the migrant jour­ney from the scree­ning at the arri­val to an expe­di­ted return if the­re are no grounds to grant the right to enter the EU, are ano­t­her clear examp­le of this.

With the­se mea­su­res, the New Pact trans­la­tes the soli­da­ri­ty princip­le into con­cre­te poli­cy mea­su­res in the main body of secon­da­ry law (legal acts that stem from the EU trea­ties’ pro­vi­si­ons and princi­ples). Ther­eby, the rules for respon­si­bi­li­ty-allo­ca­ti­on (Dub­lin cri­te­ria) are com­ple­men­ted with an arran­ge­ment for acti­ve soli­da­ri­ty bet­ween mem­ber sta­tes, which has been lar­ge­ly absent from EU migra­ti­on poli­cy. Howe­ver, the fle­xi­bi­li­ty and dis­cre­ti­on offe­red to mem­ber sta­tes to ful­fill their soli­da­ri­ty obli­ga­ti­ons under the­se clau­ses indi­ca­te the com­pro­mi­ses that had to be made to over­co­me the pre­vious fai­led attempts to inject soli­da­ri­ty into Dub­lin. Yet, the estab­lish­ment of a new soli­da­ri­ty mecha­nism and a soli­da­ri­ty fund repres­ents a step for­ward in the insti­tu­tio­na­liz­a­ti­on of soli­da­ri­ty among mem­ber states.

In sum, the New Pact is a com­pro­mi­se to accom­mo­da­te the oppo­si­ti­on towards the man­da­to­ry relo­ca­ti­on of asyl­um-see­kers while lar­ge­ly main­tai­ning Dub­lin respon­si­bi­li­ty rules. This has been the pri­ce to pay for fin­ding a com­mon poli­ti­cal ground among mem­ber sta­tes. The result is that the EU’s com­mit­ment to respon­si­bi­li­ty-sharing beco­mes broa­der, invol­ving the sharing of norms, money, and peop­le, and pro­vi­ding mem­ber sta­tes the fle­xi­bi­li­ty in their con­tri­bu­ti­ons to enhan­ced soli­da­ri­ty, ran­ging from relo­ca­ting refu­gees to enfor­cing migra­ti­on management.

Will It Make a Difference?

While the Euro­pean Com­mis­si­on is eager to demons­tra­te bold action and effec­ti­ve pro­blem-sol­ving ahead of an elec­tion cycle with anti-immi­gra­ti­on for­ces poi­sed to make big gains, the big ques­ti­on is: Will this deal lead to more soli­da­ri­ty and a more equi­ta­ble sharing of pro­tec­tion respon­si­bi­li­ties? Reaching a poli­ti­cal agree­ment on the key texts of the New Pact is undoub­ted­ly an important mile­stone for EU migra­ti­on and asyl­um poli­cy deve­lo­p­ment. Sub­stan­tively, the move to a fle­xi­ble and mul­ti-dimen­sio­nal model of respon­si­bi­li­ty-sharing should allow for the accom­mo­da­ti­on of the dif­fe­rent cir­cum­s­tan­ces of mem­ber sta­tes and the dif­fe­ren­tia­ti­on of soli­da­ri­ty con­tri­bu­ti­ons can make the sys­tem more effi­ci­ent. The­re are howe­ver two major chal­len­ges that will ulti­mate­ly limit the impact of the reform on responsibility-sharing.

First, the new rules and instru­ments only work if they are imple­men­ted and sta­ke­hol­ders are wil­ling to com­ply with them. The poli­ti­cal agree­ment is one on the gene­ral princi­ples, whe­re­as the tech­ni­cal details are still con­tes­ted among mem­ber sta­tes. Moreo­ver, the pro­vi­si­ons of the New Pact have been qua­li­fied as very com­plex, cas­ting fur­ther doubts on an effec­ti­ve prac­ti­cal imple­men­ta­ti­on. Tog­e­ther with the lee­way and fle­xi­bi­li­ty that the New Pact pro­vi­des to mem­ber sta­tes, this means that signi­fi­cant poli­ti­cal will is necessa­ry for the new rules to work in favor of more solidarity.

Second, the struc­tu­ral imba­lan­ces in refu­gee arri­vals and their insti­tu­tio­na­liz­a­ti­on by the Dub­lin cri­te­ria to assign respon­si­bi­li­ty based on first ent­ry will be lar­ge­ly left unal­te­red, not­with­stan­ding the inclu­si­on of an exten­ded scope of grounds for fami­ly reuni­fi­ca­ti­on or ties with an applicant’s edu­ca­tio­nal attain­ments in an EU mem­ber sta­te. As a result, the front­li­ne sta­tes in the EU’s peri­phe­ry will still recei­ve most arri­vals and con­se­quent­ly be respon­si­ble for pro­ces­sing their asyl­um request. The incen­ti­ves for sta­tes to faci­li­ta­te and for asyl­um-see­kers to enga­ge in secon­da­ry move­ments will the­re­fo­re hard­ly wane.

Over­all, the New Pact does not revo­lu­tio­ni­ze Euro­pean migra­ti­on gover­nan­ce and is rather a prag­ma­tic modi­fi­ca­ti­on of the sys­tem of respon­si­bi­li­ty-sharing to over­co­me the poli­ti­cal dead­lock. We should the­re­fo­re not expect won­ders but at best incre­men­tal effi­ci­en­cy gains from a more fle­xi­ble approach.


Refe­rence:

  • Bache­let, M., Lutz, P. “A New Pact on Migra­ti­on and Asyl­um: What Chan­ges for Respon­si­bi­li­ty-Sharing in the Euro­pean Uni­on?”, nccr on the move — blog, 28.02.2024.

This arti­cle was edi­ted by Remo Parisi.

Bild: unsplash.com

image_pdfimage_print