The Estonian Presidency of the Council of the EU put a draft compromise to national ambassadors to the EU (Coreper) on Wednesday morning 29 November on the controversial reform of the so-called Dublin regulation, which determines the responsibilities among member states with regard to handling asylum requests.
The Presidency proposes to remove the requirement for all member states to be involved in relocation, a matter on which it has so far been impossible to come to agreement. It also wishes to focus more on upstream crisis prevention rather than management of the consequences, such as by means of emergency relocation as was decided in 2015 at the height of the migration crisis.
The Estonian proposal unveiled at breakfast time could move things forward and make agreement possible between now and June 2018, a source said, that date being the deadline the European Council set itself for achieving consensus on this reform (see EUROPE 11887).
“A la carte” solidarity. The Presidency compromise proposal would bring an end to the requirement for all member states to be involved in relocation of asylum seekers triggered in the event of a serious migration crisis. Only those member states willing to accept asylum seekers will be involved if they have offered and if they have given their agreement for the country holding the asylum seekers.
Rather than swapping such and such a solidarity measure for another – a system of “alternative solidarity” judged too complicated to put into practice – each member state would now show its way of showing solidarity by opting, for example, for relocation from Greece or Italy, sending border guards or experts to migrant “hotspots” or resettlement from third countries.
These solidarity measures could be offered and even implemented at an early stage in a crisis when migratory flow start becoming greater than normal. With this approach, the task of assessing the situation will fall to the European Commission.
It is only at a later stage, once a specific crisis threshold has been reached, that the aid measures initially identified will become compulsory. The threshold remains to be determined but the second phase will be triggered when a country reaches more than 150 times its “fair share” of efforts to take in asylum seekers. The reference period used to determine the threshold will be subject to discussion and is likely to prove difficult.
In the crisis phase, member states would thus be required to put into effect what they opted for in the first phase. Experience has shown that no country has so far refused to help countries overwhelmed by the arrival of migrants. The Estonian Presidency does not, therefore, envisage a scenario in which a member state would not show solidarity with its fellow members.
According to a source, the Presidency proposal was well received on Wednesday even though in-depth discussion will not take place before 2018. There is no appetite for including this issue in mid-December’s European summit, the 28-member states already having weighty matters to deal with, such as Brexit negotiations (see other article).
The Justice and Home Affairs Council at the start of December will not be the place to debate the compromise, either. Officially, it will only be in June of next year that European leaders will get down to discussing “Dublin”.
The compromise, however, is diametrically opposed to the European Parliament position agreed in October (see EUROPE 11887). This civil liberties committee, supported by the November plenary session, call for mandatory automatic relocation with effect from the first asylum seeker to arrive in whatever EU country and financial retaliatory measures against countries failing to play their part – a plan described by and diplomatic source on Wednesday as “idealistic”.
Political agreement in principle on reception conditions for refugees. On Wednesday, Coreper adopted its negotiating position on the directive on reception conditions for refugees, one of the most sensitive points of which is whether at asylum seekers should be able to join the jobs market.
The directive will set minimum reception conditions that will provide those seeking international protection with a similar standard of living across all member states in order to restrict secondary flows. The directive, thus, sets out the reception conditions that can be expected, including the material reception conditions and access to healthcare. It also establishes that those seeking international protection must have access to the labour market nine months after the submission of their application at the latest. If asylum seekers have sufficient means, they may be required to cover or to contribute to the cost of the reception conditions.
To avoid secondary movement, the draft directive restricts the provision of reception conditions to the member state responsible for handling the request for international protection. Furthermore, it will only be possible to provide asylum seekers with travel documents if serious humanitarian reasons justifying their presence in another EU country exist.
Member states will be able to restrict the freedom of movement of applicants to a geographical area within their territory and allocate asylum seekers with a specific place of residence. If these measures are insufficient and in cases of the risk of flight, member states will be able to use detention.
Lastly, the national ambassadors to the EU extended the terms of the qualification directive, which relates to the criteria that have to be met to be able to claim international protection. The definition of family members and an annex on information to be asked of asylum seekers were left out of the initial terms, for separate negotiation. The new terms seek to reinstate these issues in the Council mandate so that negotiations can begin with the European Parliament. (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)