After years of stagnation and intense negotiations, there is already agreement in the European Union to reform migration policy common. A new Migration and Asylum Pact which will allow countries to avoid hosting relocated migrants if they pay compensation. A mechanism that has been named “flexible solidarity”.

Thus, although this system will force the Twenty-seven to respond to a partner overwhelmed by the arrival of migrants, it will allow them to avoid relocation to their territory. paying compensation assessed for each migrant that I reject. The goal is to transfer at least 30,000 migrants each year, but countries may refuse to receive part of those welcomed if they pay 20,000 euros for each transferrefused or means or funds for an equivalent value.

Precisely, one of the workhorses in the negotiations was the demand of the southern European countries for a mandatory solidarity in the distribution of burdens by all EU countries, in the face of resistance from the countries of the north and east. Finally, the new regulation will establish a mechanism for solidarity, but ‘à la carte’. These are your keys:

  • Distribution of the migratory burden. With the new pact, the Twenty-seven commit to relocate a minimum of 30,000 asylum seekers, refuge or international protection due to their circumstances of special vulnerability. The EU always distinguishes this group from those fleeing poverty or seeking to prosper: for them, the response continues to be return at the border or expulsion to their country of origin. The regulations establish a budget to address this solidarity: 600 million euros.
  • Solidarity… but ‘à la carte’. Not all countries are obliged to welcome relocated migrants: solidarity is mandatory, yes, but a la carte, in such a way that each country can choose between hosting or paying a fee economical. They can also opt for a combination of both formulas.
  • Distribution of solidarity. Each country will be assigned a solidarity quota in terms of asylum and international protection based on its population and GDP. Both variables will be weighted equally.
  • Exceptional migratory influx. If a Member State claims that it faces an exceptional influx of migrants that collapses its national asylum system, even if it is very localized in a region or island – as is the case in Canary Islands or the Italian island of Lampedusa-, will be established exceptional solidarity mechanisms with him, obligatory, and he will be totally or partially exempted from his obligations with respect to others.
  • Instrumentation by third countries. What happens if a third country instrumentalizes migrants to try to destabilize the EU? If a case like the one in May 2021 were to occur, when Thousands of migrants crossed the border with Ceuta Given the passivity of the Moroccan authorities in the midst of a diplomatic crisis between Spain and Morocco, the Twenty-Seven have agreed to enable exceptions to asylum and border procedures. However, children under 12 years of age, families and vulnerable people must always be taken into account, individually.
  • Rescues at sea. The regulations provide that those countries that assume the most international responsibilities in search and rescue (SAR) at sea will see this effort recognized with a additional percentage to solidarity to which they are entitled. In the case of Spain, our country is responsible for the security of 1.5 million kilometers of sea, triple its surface area as a country. One million square kilometers of its SAR zone is in the Atlantic, from the Canary Islands to Mauritania.
  • Processing of asylum requests. The border countries have been complaining about the extra effort they endure because most of the asylum or protection requests They are presented in the country through which the person enters Europe and the Court of Justice of the EU has prohibited the deportation of asylum seekers while their file is being processed. Now him procedure for applying for international protection will be common to all States members and may not be processed by the country of first reception. The applicant will not be able to choose which country it is directed to, but that responsibility can be assigned to any member country taking into account factors such as whether the applicant has relatives, has studied there or speaks its official language.
  • Minors. As for the children, reduces the age from 12 to six years from which they will be subjected to same police identification procedure than adults. The agreements stipulate that the best interests of the minor will be the primary criterion in these procedures and that minors will always have the right to request international protection.

Criticism of NGOs

The truth is NGOs do not like the new immigration pact, which they denounce that it restricts international protection standards. So, Caritas Europe considers that not only “does not solve the problems” but “limits access to asylum and rights of those seeking protection.”

“It is likely that in border countries under tension, detention will become widespread and poor reception standards will be applied, even for children and people with specific needs,” warns the organization, which considers that the new solidarity mechanism ‘à la carte’ ‘ does not solve the “increasing responsibility” that will fall on European border States and transfers obligations to third countries “exposing migrants to human rights violations“.

For its part, Doctors without borders believes that the pact “simply the continuation and intensification of containment and deterrence policies” and Oxfam EU considers that what was agreed is “in many ways, much worse” and “a dangerous dismantling of key principles of human rights and refugee laws.”

The Undocumented Immigrants Platform (PICUM) has also criticized the reform, denouncing that “people They will not have any legal representation effective while they undergo procedures at the borders” and people who “appeal their expulsion order may be deported while they wait for a decision.” “We have lost an opportunity to defend and protect migrant children,” he lamented. Save the Childrenwhich states that the pact “forgets the most vulnerable.”

In turn, the Spanish Commission for Refugee Assistance (CEAR) believes that the agreement is “historic”, but “for undermine the right to asylum and human rights in the EU.” The values ​​of Europe, the entity has asserted, “are sinking even further” in the same sea where thousands of people lose their lives seeking refuge.”