The new European migration pact: a positive change or just a pre-election campaign?

By Max Rapa from DEFOIN

Since the first draft of the new European migration pact, which was unveiled in September 2020, there have been major discussions between the right and the left, as well as amongst Member States, about the suitability and efficiency of this new piece of legislation. Indeed, until the very last moment, it was not sure that the pact would get approved, as there was a growing feeling of uncertainty from all political sides. Eventually, on the afternoon of April 11, the new migration plan got approved and big celebrations were made by all major European institutions. Roberta Metsola, the President of the European Parliament, stated that the approval of the pact can be considered as “a historic day” for Europe. But can we really call it a historic day for Europe? Will the migration problem come to an end? What will be the consequences for migrants? Let us explore in more details, what the pact really is about.

According to the European Commission, the pact is a new efficient tool to manage migration to the EU. Thanks to this tool, there will be more efficient procedure, effective solidarity, international partnerships, clearer responsibilities, and an inclusive approach. This means that once migrants arrive on EU grounds, they will have new compulsory pre-entry screening to establish status swiftly on arrival, new, faster asylum border procedure, a better migration and border management system, and, also, there will be more flexibility for Member States to show solidarity with other Member States facing migratory pressure. Thus, this new pact seems to be a state-of-the-art piece of legislation, which Europe has been needing for decades.

However, this pact is facing a lot of criticism from NGOs but also from the right and the left. According to Amnesty International, more and more people will end up in detention centres (including families with children) and there will be reduced safeguards for asylum seekers trough substandard asylum procedures. Amnesty International also highlights that the pact falls short of concretely helping Member States such as Italy, Greece, and Spain, where people first arrive in Europe. This is due to the fact that the new solidarity program consists of states to simply pay to strengthen external borders, or fund countries outside the EU to prevent people from reaching Europe. As a result, a solidarity mechanism without solidarity.

Civil Rights Defenders also underlines that there will be an increased use of sensitive personal data, as the use of biometric data is at the centre of the new compulsory pre-entry screening. For example, fingerprints and facial images of children as young as six years old may be stored for up to ten years and authorities might have to use coercive measures to collect this data.

Furthermore, there are already the first Member States that oppose this new pact, such as Poland, which calls the pact a system of “mandatory solidarity”. This is because Member States will have three different options to implement this new system of managing migration flows: relocate a certain number of asylum seekers, pay €20,000 for each claimant they refuse to relocate, or finance operational support, like staff and equipment. In spite of this new wave of opposition to the pact, the EU home affair chief Johansson has clearly stated that States that will not implement the new pact will face legal action.

Therefore, the only sure thing is that the approval of the new pact will only let breathe a sign of relief mainstream parties, which are now preparing for the upcoming European elections in June and believing that this pact will show to citizens that the EU is capable of delivering effective solutions. Without a doubt, it is too early to see and verify the impact of this new migration pact, but surely it will not do any magics that will solve the migration problem in Europe overnight. Another sure thing is that in June, Europe will see what citizens really think about this pact after almost four years of painstakingly slow negotiations to stimulate it. In conclusion, yes, the EU delivers, but sometimes too slowly and with too many criticisms that do not consider human dignity.

REFERENCES

• https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2024/04/10/european-parliament-narrowly-endorses-eu-migration-reform-moving-it-closer-to-the-finish-l
• https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/12/eu-migration-pact-agreement-will-lead-to-a-surge-in-suffering/
• https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/promoting-our-european-way-life/migration-and-asylum/pact-migration-and-asylum_en
• https://crd.org/2024/04/11/the-eus-new-migration-and-asylum-pact-hollows-out-the-right-to-asylum/
• https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2024/04/11/eu-countries-not-enforcing-migration-pact-could-face-legal-action-says-johansson