EU ministers propose walls, fences, surveillance for migration ‘solidarity’ mechanism

EU ministers are ready to fund walls, fences, and barbed wire in third countries to prevent migrants’ departures, and boost surveillance at EU borders as part of a migration ‘solidarity’ mechanism, according to closed-doors negotiations among EU lawmakers on Monday and Tuesday (18-19 December).

Initial discussions were about the possibility of introducing a solidarity mechanism, for instance, triggering relocations of migrants, or any other form of solidarity, such as financial contributions to countries in difficulties, or the provision of equipment.

However, the nature of the solidarity mechanism could be radically changed by a supplementary set of measures to make EU borders more impenetrable.

The Migration Pact is a group of legislative files that will set a new regime of EU migration management if a deal is reached before the end of this mandate.

With negotiations still ongoing, the Regulation on Asylum Migration Management (RAMM), has been the most discussed file of the migration pact in public debates and media.

RAMM will put in place rules of ‘solidarity’ when one or more countries are experiencing difficulties in managing a high number of migrants arriving in their territory.

In the proposals made by EU ministers and MEPs, the RAMM would include a ‘solidarity pool’ that will gather information on how ‘contributing countries’ will help member states in difficulties, as the focal point of the solidarity mechanism.

At the moment, the European Commission and EU ministers are willing to keep the decisions on solidarity (who makes the contributions and how) as classified information, with a top Commission official explaining that public disclosure of such information could be a ‘pull factor’ for migrants.

Another point under discussion is relocation triggered by family reunification. According to the latest negotiations, EU ministers do not want to recognise siblings as beneficiaries of family reunification.

“European leaders are trying to restrict access to family reunion, excluding families legally residing in the EU without international protection,” Save the Children’s Federica Toscano told Euractiv.

“This Pact endangers families and blatantly violates children’s rights. Not only does it mandate the systematic detention of families arriving together in Europe, but also separates children from their parents and tears siblings apart,” Toscano added.

Crisis Management

Another file on the table is the Crisis Management regulation, which would trigger a mechanism that puts in place a set of rules when there is a situation of ‘crisis’.

So far, three scenarios are envisaged: a crisis triggered by a “massive influx” of people arriving at EU borders; a situation of ‘force majeure’ (a massive arrival due to wars, climate, or any other humanitarian emergency); and ‘instrumentalisation’ – where a state or a non-state actor facilitates the passage of migrants.

The European Commission, but particularly EU member states, will likely have important decision-making powers in the governance of the crisis management, particularly on when to trigger ‘the crisis’.

The duration of the crisis will probably be limited to a maximum of 12 months and member states will have discretionary powers on how to contribute to help countries which are experiencing the crisis in their territory.

In the crisis situation, emergency border procedures will be applied. Civil society organisations say that the emergency procedures will be detrimental for asylum seekers, since guarantees for people looking for protection will be reduced.

“The ongoing discussions on the crisis and instrumentalisation proposals are extremely alarming. The proposals to allow states to disregard asylum standards in a vague and expansive set of situations would be a severe attack on asylum in Europe,” Amnesty International’s EU migration spokesperson, Olivia Sundberg told Euractiv.

It would place people seeking safety at more risk, undermine common responses at borders, and “make emergency measures a norm across the EU territory”, Sundberg added.

Another open debate concerns guarantees that NGOs will not be identified as hostile non-state actors responsible for ‘instrumentalisation’, which would put them in the same category as Russia, Belarus, or Morocco, or airlines that have organised flights to bring migrants to their EU borders.

The European Parliament is asking for further specification to protect NGOs (particularly those operating in search and rescue activities at sea) from such classification.

EU ministers identify ‘non-state actors’ as cause of migration spikes

EU interior ministers agreed to classify ‘non state actors’ such as NGOs on a par with Russia and Belarus in causing increased levels of migration, as they agreed their position on a new crisis management law.

Asylum Procedures Regulation

Another key file is the Asylum Procedure Regulation, which would regulate border procedures for some categories of people at EU level.

This border procedure would be mandatory for applicants who have less than 20% of recognition (of international protection) rate, any applicants labelled as ‘security risk’ (including unaccompanied minors), and applicants ‘misleading’ the authorities.

There will probably be no free-of-charge legal assistance and representation at the administrative stage, including during the border procedures. Instead, It is likely that free legal counselling will be offered to applicants, funded by the EU.

Another point of discussion is whether to consider an application ‘inadmissible’ based on the country of origin and the possibility to use detention facilities in some cases.

“The ongoing discussions point to an expanded, mandatory use of border procedures for certain groups, which involve fewer legal safeguards, rather than a fair and full assessment of their asylum claims,” said Amnesty’s Sundberg.

“People would very likely be de facto detained and not considered to be in EU territory for their duration, which could be several months. Even families with children would not be exempted from this.”

The Politics of the Pact

MEPs and ministers started this round of negotiations, known as trilogues, on Monday (18 December) and resumed again on Tuesday, when discussions are supposed to end.

The Spanish EU Council Presidency aims to have the whole package approved before its mandate expires at the end of the year. However, there are still many open points that might postpone an agreement to early 2024 and the incoming Belgian Presidency.

Spanish Presidency seeks migration deal by year-end, though divisions persist

The Spanish EU presidency aims at conclude negotiation on the migration reform package, a series of laws on migration management, before the end of the year, multiple sources from the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament confirmed to Euractiv.

The …

To seal the deal on time, a provisional agreement among EU lawmakers has to be reached by next February ahead of the next EU elections in June.

If there is no agreement by then, it will be the EU’s the second failure in ten years to put in place a comprehensive EU system of migration management.

[Edited by Zoran Radosavljevic/Benjamin Fox]