On Wednesday 2 May, the ambassadors of the member states to the European Union (Coreper) again discussed the progress in the work of the Council of the EU on reforming the so-called ‘Dublin’ regulation, which governs the responsibilities of the member states in asylum procedures.
More specifically, the diplomats looked at the solidarity mechanisms in the event of migration crises, in the wake of the reflections of the ‘Group of friends of the Presidency’, which discussed this aspect between 25 and 27 April.
The Bulgarian Presidency of the Council of the EU asked the ambassadors to feed in orientations ahead of a further Coreper meeting scheduled for Tuesday 15 May, during which it intends to make new compromise proposals.
The delegations took the floor on the various points of the note - such as financial assistance measures, allocation (or relocation) measures for migrants and the key that will determine these ‘relocation’ measures - but with no definitive approval, one source reported, as the subject remains extremely sensitive.
In a preparatory note ahead of the meeting dated 30 April of which EUROPE has had sight, the Bulgarian Presidency promises to work towards a compromise that is acceptable to all countries. In it, it lists several of the observations made by five countries of the southern EU in a joint letter (see EUROPE 12011).
In this document, the Presidency once again details its vision of responses in the event of crisis. The solidarity mechanism would be arranged around three phases: normal circumstances, difficult circumstances (a phase to be sub-divided into two sub-phases) and severe circumstances.
Member states that have reached 100% of reasonable capacity (‘fair share’) to host asylum seekers would be entitled to financial support, but only when they reach 120% would they be able to benefit from measures such as the voluntary relocation of asylum seekers to other member states.
The Bulgarian Presidency has reduced the threshold to trigger the second sub-phase of the ‘difficult circumstances’ phase, having proposed to reduce this from 160%-180% of reasonable hosting capacity to 140%-160%, combined with an overshoot threshold corresponding to 0.15% of its population.
In response to the concerns raised by the countries of the south on prior controls (‘pre-Dublin checks’) to examine the eligibility of an application in advance, Sofia proposes sticking to just the compulsory security controls, so as not to overload countries struggling under an influx of applications.
If a member state reaches a number of asylum seekers corresponding to 140% of its hosting capacity and more than 0.15% of its population, the Commission may put before the Council a proposed implementing decision setting out the additional support measures required, the note reads.
All voluntary contributions paid in during the first sub-phase of the ‘difficult circumstances’ phase would be deducted from the contributions under the second sub-phase. The procedure would also be designed to ensure that a decision is made by the Council no more than two weeks after a member state has reached the 160% threshold. ‘Allocations’ should continue until a member state has returned to 100% of its fair share.
The European Council would intervene only in the third phase of the solidarity mechanism, that of severe circumstances.
Seeking a balance in allocating asylum seekers
The Bulgarian note takes up the work carried out so far on the system to allocate migrants from one member state to another.
The current Presidency of the Council points out that the question of allocation has been discussed at great length in recent years and that certain member states remain sceptical as to the added value of this measure. At the end of 2017, Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic were brought before the Court of Justice of the EU over their persistent refusal to relocate asylum seekers (see EUROPE 11921).
However, the Bulgarian Presidency is not ruling out the mechanism, which may apply from the first phase of difficult circumstances on a voluntary basis. However, it considers that all measures should certainly be taken to manage flows and avoid the need to move to allocations.
The Presidency’s proposal lists three ways of triggering the asylum seeker allocation system in order to make targeted and proportionate use of it.
The system is so designed that if it is applied effectively from the first stages in which a member state reaches 120% of its reasonable hosting capacity, it will be able to alleviate disproportionate pressure by dint of voluntary contributions from the other member states.
However, if these voluntary contributions prove insufficient, they will be offset, during the ‘difficult circumstances’ phase, by a structured allocation system, for instance on the basis of bilateral agreements between member states or a Commission proposal, which would give financial benefits to member states wishing to help another country via allocations.
No quota will be applied, but the member states will receive requests in line with a key based on GDP and population. The future European asylum agency is expected to be responsible for the calculations.
Measures that will provide a partial alternative to relocation
Theoretically, the note goes on to state, although providing effective support requires all member states to participate in all measures decided upon by the Council in this second sub-phase, the mechanism must be applied flexibly.
There will therefore be the option for member states to replace up to 50% of relocation actions for asylum seekers with other forms of contribution, such as financial support or resettling refugees directly from the countries of origin or of transit.
However, the document seems to be saying that no country will be able to avoid relocations altogether.
In any event, the Bulgarian Presidency proposes amounts to be paid into the EU budget of between €25,000 and €35,000 per person not hosted. It also proposes strict controls on the profile of individuals who may be ‘allocated’ to other countries, proposing that only certain candidates for international protection be eligible for the system.
The next meeting of the ‘Friends of the Presidency’ will be held early next week. (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)