This blog is hosted on Ideas on EuropeIdeas on Europe Avatar

Irregular Migration

EU policymaking in the context of irregular migration

Latest

The Nice Treaty: qualified majority rule is postponed

The main objective of the Treaty of Nice, which entered into force in 2003, was to reform the institutional structure of the EU in order to facilitate the accession of ten new member states, an undertaking which was previously planned to have been accomplished by the Amsterdam Treaty.

Nice, however, failed to make significant progress in the context of EU asylum and migration policymaking, primarily as the application of the qualified majority rule, granting the European Parliament (EP) co-decision power rather than mere consultation, was postponed. The unanimity requirement for the adoption of legislation in this area thus continued to hamper the legislative process. Nevertheless, the first phase of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) was completed in 2005, under Nice, following the adoption of the Qualification Directive (QD) and the Asylum Procedures Directive (APD), yet it remained limited to minimum standards (Niemann, 2012).

The QD, adopted in 2004, set out the conditions for the qualification and status of third-country nationals (TCNs) or stateless persons as refugees or as beneficiaries of subsidiary protection. According to the Directive, asylum applicants are granted refugee status on the basis of the Refugee Convention, while subsidiary protection is granted in cases where the requirements of the Convention are not met but the asylum applicant ‘would face a real risk of suffering serious harm’ if returned to his or her country of origin (Art. 2 (e)). As a result, the content for refugees and subsidiary protection holders differs in certain respects, with the latter granted limited rights compared to the former (such as access to healthcare, social benefits, labour market, as well as duration of residence permit, Arts. 24-33). The highly polarised negotiations prior to the adoption of the Directive, with the Commission and the EP pushing for higher standards of protection for asylum seekers and the Council’s focus on the prevention of abuse of the asylum system and on irregular arrivals, are illustrative of the difficulties in reaching political agreement in this sovereignty-sensitive policy domain (Velluti, 2014). The resulting QD proved to be an instrument of compromise and political pressure to be adopted before ten new states joined the EU on 1 May 2004, bringing new views and legal heritages. This partially explains the passage of some poorly drafted provisions and the interpretative difficulties of national courts in applying the scope of subsidiary protection, highlighted in the seminal CJEU judgment of 2009 in the case of Elgafaji.

In 2004, FRONTEX, the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the EU, was set up in response to the need to strengthen the management of the EU’s external borders. According to the Regulation establishing the agency, however, it is the member states that remain responsible for control and surveillance of external borders. In other words, the agency is merely tasked with the ‘coordination’ of national forces. Following the unprecedented influx of irregular migrants in 2015 and 2016, Frontex was reformed into a ‘European Border and Coast Guard Agency’ (EBCG) giving it a broader mandate, as the EU focus shifted further towards strengthening the external borders (Carrera and den Hertog, 2016). Nevertheless, given that the EBCG has not been transformed into a centralised agency means that, like its predecessor, it remains incapable of solving the structural problem of European border management (De Bruycker, 2016).

In December 2005, the adoption of the APD completed what is referred to as the first phase of the CEAS. The Directive aimed to establish minimum standards for procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection in order to reduce the disparities between member states. However, given the fact that the APD was adopted beyond the May 2004 deadline, due to deep divisions on several contentious matters, highlights the difficulty in reaching agreement in this sovereignty-sensitive policy domain.

Following the implementation of the Tampere Programme (1999-2004), the Hague Programme, adopted by the European Council at the end of 2004 outlined the objectives of a second multiannual justice and home affairs (JHA) programme for the period 2005-2009. Hague reiterated the objective to create a CEAS and called for second-phase instruments to harmonise common standards for asylum to be adopted by the end of 2010. Most of the legislative instruments, however, were eventually adopted in 2013.

 

References

Carrera, S. and Den Hertog, L. (2016) A European Border and Coast Guard: What’s in a Name? CEPS Paper in Liberty and Security in Europe No. 88, Brussels, 8 March. Available from: https://www.ceps.eu/ceps-publications/european-border-and-coast-guard-whats-name/

Case C-465/07, Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 17 February 2009, Meki Elgafaji and Noor Elgafaji v Staatssecretaris van Justitie.

Council Directive 2004/83/EC

Council Directive 2005/85/EC 

Council Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004

De Bruycker, P. (2016) The European Border and Coast Guard: A New Model Built on an Old Logic, European Papers, 1 (2), pp. 559-569. Available from: https://doi.org/10.15166/2499-8249/53 

Niemann, A. (2012) The Dynamics of EU Migration Policy: From Maastricht to Lisbon. In: Richardson, J., (ed.) Constructing a Policy-Making State? Policy Dynamics in the EU. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 209-233.

Regulation (EU) 2016/1624

The Hague Programme: strengthening freedom, security and justice in the European Union, 2005.

Velluti, S. (2014) Reforming the Common European Asylum System – Legislative Developments and Judicial Activism of the European Courts. London: Springer.

COMMENT

Recent Articles

The Treaty of Amsterdam: first steps towards a Common European Asylum System

Published on by | Comments Off on The Treaty of Amsterdam: first steps towards a Common European Asylum System

The entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty in 1999 reshaped cooperation in justice and home affairs (JHA) thus marking a new phase in EU asylum and migration policymaking. A primary goal of the Treaty was to progressively establish an area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ). Consequently, issues related to asylum, migration and external […]

The Treaty of Maastricht: issues of asylum and migration become ‘matters of common interest’

Published on by | Comments Off on The Treaty of Maastricht: issues of asylum and migration become ‘matters of common interest’

The Treaty of Maastricht (1993), which established the EU and introduced a three-pillar system of policymaking, formalised intergovernmental cooperation in the field of asylum and migration between the 12 EC states. The first pillar, also known as the European Community, was the only pillar with a legal personality and covered the vast majority of EU […]

The evolution of EU asylum and migration policies: Towards supranational cooperation?

Published on by | Comments Off on The evolution of EU asylum and migration policies: Towards supranational cooperation?

European cooperation in the field of asylum and migration accelerated after the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty in 1993 which involved a major overhaul of the founding treaties, establishing the EU and formalising intergovernmental cooperation in the area of Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) under the third pillar. Subsequently, in 1999, the Treaty […]

The evolution of EU asylum and migration policies: historical background

Published on by | Comments Off on The evolution of EU asylum and migration policies: historical background

Given that issues related to asylum and migration touch upon state sovereignty, the founding Treaties of the European Communities (EC) did not comprise any rules aimed at the ceding of competences from the national to the supranational level. The main objective of the 1957 Treaty of Rome, which established the European Economic Community (EEC), involved […]

An Introduction to the development of EU cooperation in the field of asylum and migration

Published on by | Comments Off on An Introduction to the development of EU cooperation in the field of asylum and migration

The first efforts to cooperate in matters of asylum and migration at the European level can be mainly attributed to the mass inflow of asylum seekers during the late 1980s and early 1990s, following the end of the Cold War and the collapse of communist regimes in Eastern Europe. As an initial response to the […]

EU Integration and Policy (In)coherence towards Irregular Migration

Published on by | Comments Off on EU Integration and Policy (In)coherence towards Irregular Migration

Irregular migration in the European Union (EU) dominates the current EU political agenda. It is also the top concern of European citizens, according to the latest Standard Eurobarometer (Spring 2019). EU member states, however, are not affected to the same degree, resulting in political friction with regard to how to deal with the challenges of […]

Italy and Malta are not the villains of Europe’s migration crisis

Published on by | Comments Off on Italy and Malta are not the villains of Europe’s migration crisis

Since 2018, Italy and Malta have restricted access to their ports for NGO migrant rescue vessels. While both countries have faced criticism for this policy, it should be noted that since the 1990s, most EU member states have erected barriers along their borders to prevent irregular migration. There is, therefore, a degree of hypocrisy in […]

The EU’s Pact on Migration and Asylum will do little to ease the pressure on southern member states

Published on by | Comments Off on The EU’s Pact on Migration and Asylum will do little to ease the pressure on southern member states

In September 2020, the European Commission published a new ‘Pact on Migration and Asylum’ aimed at addressing the issue of irregular migration in the EU. This article argues that the proposed measures will not help alleviate migration pressure on the EU’s southern member states. On 23 September 2020, the European Commission presented its much-awaited ‘New […]

Why EU states are converging on restrictive migration policies, despite their different political traditions

Published on by | Comments Off on Why EU states are converging on restrictive migration policies, despite their different political traditions

Differing political cultures and migration traditions among EU member states have given rise to a variety of national policy approaches toward irregular migration. While in principle this diversity hinders agreement on common asylum and migration policies, EU member states are now increasingly converging toward more restrictive migration policies. National policy approaches are deeply rooted in […]

Assessing the impact of Covid-19 on the EU’s response to irregular migration

Published on by | Comments Off on Assessing the impact of Covid-19 on the EU’s response to irregular migration

Covid-19 has once again put EU solidarity to the test. While much of the focus has been on the pandemic’s impact on healthcare and the European economy, it has also pushed states further apart on the issue of irregular migration. Prior to the Covid-19 outbreak, the issue of irregular migration had been at the top […]

UACES and Ideas on Europe do not take responsibility for opinions expressed in articles on blogs hosted on Ideas on Europe. All opinions are those of the contributing authors.