On Wednesday 26 November, the representatives of the EU Member States will discuss the proposed revisions to the concepts of ‘safe third country’ (STC) and ‘safe country of origin’ (SCO), the latter accompanied by a common list of ‘safe countries of origin’, with a view to reaching a political agreement (‘general approach’) at the EU Council on 8 December, as the European Parliament, for its part, is expected to move closer to a former ‘Venezuela’ majority on these same two texts at a vote scheduled for 3 December in the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties.
According to several sources, the EPP, ECR, PfE and ESN groups will reportedly support the reports by Lena Düpont (EPP, German) on the STC concept and Alessandro Ciriani (ECR, Italian) on the SCO. The name ‘Venezuela’ is linked to the very first time these groups came together on a non-legislative text on this country.
From the outset, the two rapporteurs urged their colleagues to quickly approve these amendments to the Asylum Procedures Regulation (APR), which will not enter into force until June 2026, but which the Commission has already proposed to speed up and review (see EUROPE 13756/19, 13754/6, 13729/4).
The allocations of the two reports had also been deliberately made between the EPP and ECR groups, which was denounced by MEPs in July (see EUROPE 13673/17).
The groups’ positions for the votes on 3 December will be finalised this week, particularly in the S&D group on 26 November. But part of Renew Europe could also support both reports. On the concept of ‘safe third countries’, one of the most sensitive elements is the removal of the suspensive effect of appeals, but also the fact that the STC concept would apply to third countries by virtue of agreements or simple arrangements. Nor is the principle of non-transfer of minors enshrined.
Concerning the ‘safe countries of origin’, the Italian rapporteur for the ECR recently presented his compromise amendments.
No judicial supervision of information ‘sources’. The designation of a third country as a ‘safe country of origin'’ whether at EU level or in a national list, is based on reliable, official and duly substantiated sources. “Therefore, such sources should not be subject to national judicial review”, says an amendment, referring to the legal setbacks of the ‘Meloni’ government in applying the protocol with Albania.
“Moreover, the designation reflects the general situation in that country and is not affected by the individual circumstances, which may only be assessed for the purposes of determining whether the safe country of origin concept should exceptionally not be applied in a specific case. Therefore, national judicial review should just be limited to examining the detailed evidence provided by the applicant regarding his or her specific individual situation, justifying, in his or her case, the inapplicability of the concept of safe country of origin, and not the designation as such”.
The Regulation respects fundamental rights and observes the principles of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, “while ensuring a balanced implementation, that also upholds the Union’s objective of maintaining credible asylum procedures, effective migration management and the protection of the external borders”, according to another amendment. (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)