On Wednesday 15 March, Member States’ experts discussed a new compromise submitted by the Swedish Presidency of the EU Council on the ‘Pact on Migration and Asylum’ regulation on asylum procedures.
After the adoption of a partial mandate in December (see EUROPE 13088/6), the Swedish Presidency expects to obtain a full mandate on the other parts of the regulation, in particular the new ‘border procedure’, which combines an asylum procedure with a rapid examination of the application and a return decision at the same time, if the application is unfounded.
This procedure is linked to the concept of ‘safe third countries’ and a list that would allow the competent authorities to use the low recognition rates of asylum applications by nationality as a basis for recourse.
However, the border procedure raises questions about the capacity required at Member State level; in the European Parliament, the mandatory nature of the border procedure also divides the groups.
“In addition to the articles on border procedure, which will be the focus of the JHA members’ meeting, the Presidency also intends to initiate an informal exchange of views on Section V on safe country concepts (Articles 43a-50 )”, explains a note of 10 March.
“These concepts are an important part of the asylum regulation and, where appropriate, can help to speed up the asylum procedure. The recent European Council conclusions of 9 February also called on Member States to adopt a more coordinated approach to the use of the concepts of safe third countries and safe countries of origin and to pave the way for a common list at EU level”.
The compromise text clarifies certain elements of the border procedure, such as the definition of ‘adequate capacity’ or the special needs of certain persons.
While the Commission’s proposal considers that unaccompanied minors and minors under 12 years of age and their family members are only subject to the border procedure when they are considered to be a danger to national security or public order, the work in the EU Council specifies the modalities for verifying the age of children in case of doubt, but medical examinations to achieve this should only be a last resort.
On the concept of ‘safe third countries’, which is different from the concept of ‘safe countries of origin’, the compromise states that the ‘safe third country’ concept can only be applied if the applicant cannot demonstrate the existence of elements justifying that the ‘safe third country’ concept is not applicable to him/her and, in the case of unaccompanied minors, where there are clear indications that the applicant will be admitted or readmitted by the third country and that his/her rights will be guaranteed.
The concept can also apply when the EU and a third country have jointly reached a declaration, arrangement or agreement that migrants will be admitted to the third country and will be protected in accordance with relevant international standards and in full respect of non-pushback.
Four mandates voted in the Committee on Civil Liberties on 28 March
A vote is now scheduled for 28 March in the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties on 4 texts, namely : ‘Asylum Procedures’, ‘Migrant Screening’, ‘Crisis Situations’ and ‘Asylum and Migration Management’ (AMM).
If all goes well, the European Parliament will therefore be in a position to start negotiations with the EU Council in accordance with the Roadmap of last September.
With regard to ‘Screening’, the sensitive issues still concern the detention of migrants, the legal fiction of ‘non-entry’, which will not be abolished, but also the independent monitoring mechanism of the respect of fundamental rights in these ‘screening’ procedures, the mandate of the EU Council being considered particularly weak on this point. EUROPE will continue to follow this story.
Link to the compromise: https://aeur.eu/f/5SP (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)