Brussels, 15/11/2011 (Agence Europe) - Should European rules on family reunification be changed? Under pressure from several member states (such as the Netherlands) to strengthen provisions and introduce additional criteria, the European Commission opened the debate on Tuesday 15 November in a Green Paper, which is supposed to decide the future of the current directive dating back to 2003.
The Commission explains that family reunification now accounts for a large part of legal immigration in Europe. Although it has decreased, legal immigration through family reunification accounts for a third of total immigration in the EU, as opposed to 50% at the beginning of the last decade. Family immigration is moreover “even smaller when singling out migrants targeted by the family reunification directive ( i.e. only third-country nationals joining non-EU citizens): 21% of the overall permits are released to this category of migrants, comprising roughtly 500,000 people in 2010”, explains the Commission. Contrary to the migration of workers, member states cannot set in advance the number of people admitted within the family reunification category, the Charter of Fundamental Rights stipulating that respect for family life must be respected.
There is a problem, however - some member states have for a number of years considered that this directive (which allows a certain margin of manoeuvre) opens the door to abuses being committed, such as marriages of convenience, and they would like additional conditions to be introduced to the reunification category, in an effort to improve the management of migration flows. Last May, The Hague, for example, indicated to the commissioner responsible for this question, Cecilia Malmström, its wish to raise the age limit to 24 for partners who sought family reunion and expressed a wish to restrict reunification to a single new partner for a 10-year period. The Netherlands also called on the commissioner to tighten up European rules. The commissioner did not greet this request with much enthusiasm but the Commission did, nevertheless, make a commitment on 4 May in its communication on migration to open up the debate on this question.
This debate is therefore expected to last until 1 March 2012 and member states, NGOs and other stakeholders concerned will be required to respond to a series of different questions. Governments will therefore be called on to explain the kind and number of abuses committed that they have to confront. They will also have to say which people will be eligible for reunification under the terms of the directive. According to the text of the 2003 directive, a residence permit is required for a period of one year or more, as well as reasonable prospects of obtaining the right of permanent residence. This second condition, however, is too vague, according to the Commission. It creates legal insecurity and could lead to “the exclusion of almost all nationals from third countries from the directive's scope” explains the Commission in its Green Paper.
With regard to eligible family members, the Commission is examining the question of legitimacy of setting a minimum age limit for partners (this could be different from the legal age for adults in member states which cannot not currently exceed 21). This possibility has been used by governments to prevent the possibility of forced marriages occurring. The Commission is, for example, asking governments whether other resources could be found to fight against this phenomenon. The questions of integrating the reunifications are also posed. According to the current law, member states are not bound by it but can, if they so wish, put in place the measures, such as language tests, for example, which certain countries have made into admission criteria. Faced with these different measures put in place in member states, the Commission is first of all asking whether these measures are effective and whether the tests, for example, are carried out with all the documents translated and with appropriate aid provided to the candidates. It would also like to know whether these provisions are really aimed at promoting integration or, rather, creating another hidden barrier to reunification.
The principle of taking into account the prevailing interest of the child, as acknowledged in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, is also subject to question in this Green Paper. The Commission is asking how this principle can be better guaranteed. At this stage, member states have not therefore explicitly referred to the Charter, explained the Commission, but have applied this principle by making general references to international instruments. The Green Paper also highlights specific situations affecting refugees, asylum seekers and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection in the context of these rules on reunification. The Commission is due to state in 2013 whether it intends to revise the 2003 directive, clarify it or leave it unchanged. (SP/transl.fl)