It will take the Council of the EU a bit longer to finalise its mandate on the asylum procedures regulation, one of the seven texts of the 'Asylum' package, which notably defines the procedures to be followed in the processing of dossiers.
This 'procedures' regulation, which abrogates a 2013 directive, also defines the principle of 'safe third country', a concept which certain member states, such as France, hope to consolidate in order to avoid any constitutional issues.
A recent opinion of the French Council of State argued that the reform currently underway of the Dublin regulation, certain chapters of which refer to this concept of 'safe third country' as developed in the 'procedures' regulation, could prove unconstitutional.
Several documents on the discussions on the 'procedures' regulation do indeed highlight the various French reservations. However, other countries have different reservations. Overall, the discussions are going in the right direction, the member states told a meeting of the ambassadors on Wednesday 13 June, according to one source, but work must continue and the mandate will probably not be agreed upon under the Bulgarian Presidency. Several points were raised on Wednesday, such as procedures on the borders, reasons for withdrawing protection granted and the processing times for the various procedures.
On the concept of 'safe third country', certain countries, particularly France, wish to be certain that there is no automatic ineligibility of certain asylum applications on the grounds that the person in question comes from a safe third country or a safe first country of asylum.
Avoiding immediate ineligibility of an asylum application
These countries want guarantees that the eligibility of the dossier will be examined in all cases and that there will be no automatic expulsion of an asylum seeker to the first country (safe third country or safe asylum country in the EU) through which he or she transited.
The reform of the Dublin regulation presented in May 2016 brings in an eligibility test for applications, which will allow the competent authorities to determine quickly whether an individual is likely to obtain protection in the EU, in which case an accelerated procedure will be applied to that person. Discussions between the two regulations are therefore linked, but the reform of Dublin is otherwise more complicated politically (see EUROPE 12041).
At this stage, the member states have accepted a common European list of safe third countries to be drawn up in the 'procedures' regulation eventually, but “not necessarily at the time the mandate is agreed upon”, the same source explained. This list may not be ready until the regulation enters into force.
The final discussions on this subject, which were explained in a document dated 11 June, reported that the member states could continue to designate countries at national level that they consider 'safe third countries' or, a different concept again, 'safe third countries of origin' (country of which the asylum seeker directly holds the nationality).
However, countries such as Germany still have reservations and wonder, for instance, what the consequences would be for the national lists if a country was taken of the common EU list. Further technical work and drafting will be required, according to the same source. (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)