The representatives of the Member States will discuss, once again on 28 February in the ‘Asylum’ Working Party, the Asylum and Migration Management Regulation (formerly the Dublin Regulation), on the basis of a new compromise by the Swedish Presidency of the EU Council.
Dated 21 February, this document specifies, among other things, the modalities of the annual migration management cycle which organises the forecasting of Member States’ solidarity commitments and defines the responses adapted to the situations encountered by the Member States, according to the degree of pressure.
It clarifies the definitions of situations of migratory pressure and also provides new elements on transfers of asylum seekers to the first country of registration or on the ‘solidarity pool’, the set of measures available to Member States under pressure, such as relocation. The document also clarifies how a Member State under pressure can derogate from its solidarity obligations towards other countries.
On the functioning of the annual migration cycle, organised around a Commission report and recommendations for Member States (to be adopted each year before 15 October) assessing the needs and offers of solidarity aid, the new Swedish document further emphasises their confidentiality, especially with regard to the recommendation classified as “RESTRICTED EU”.
The Swedish Presidency then specifies the modalities of the annual European Migration Forum, which will be responsible for taking stock of the commitments made by the Member States and the needs identified.
It adds here a sentence on the third countries that can be invited to this High Level Forum. “Third countries which have concluded an agreement with the Union on the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in a Member State or lodged in that third country may, with a view to contributing to solidarity on an ad hoc basis, be invited to participate in the High Level Forum on Migration and the EU Technical Forum on Migration”, the text thus stipulates, without specifying whether this refers to the third countries associated with the Schengen area.
In order to define a situation of migratory pressure encountered by a Member State, the Presidency then adds in the latter text a criterion covering the number of persons taken charge of in the country under the Temporary Protection Directive as well as a criterion referring to the scale and trends of unauthorised movements of third country nationals or stateless persons between Member States.
On the ‘solidarity pool’, the text proposes that the offer of relocation should concern applicants for international protection or, where the contributing and beneficiary (relocation) Member States agree, beneficiaries of international protection who have been granted international protection less than 3 years before the adoption of the EU Council Decision establishing the solidarity pool, or “for the purpose of return” of illegally staying third country nationals or stateless persons.
A previous version only proposed the relocation of illegal immigrants. The new text reintroduces the notion of relocation for the purpose of return, which was the objective of the concept of return sponsorships, initially proposed by the Commission and then scrapped under the Czech Presidency of the EU Council.
On transfers of asylum seekers from one Member State to another, where the person concerned evades or refuses to comply with the transfer decision, “the transferring Member State retains the right to carry out the transfer within the time remaining at a later stage, but in any event within 3 or 5 years of the acceptance of the request to take charge or the confirmation of the notification to take charge by another Member State”, the text adds.
Link to the compromise: https://aeur.eu/f/5h1 (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)