2 september 2024
EU Migration Update 1 & 2/2024
In this first migration update of 2024, the Meijers Committee provides an overview of recent developments in the field of migration and asylum in the EU and the EU legislative proposals in the first two quarters of 2024. Among other things, this update discusses: the Commission’s Implementation Plan for the Asylum and Migration Pact, the start of Hungary’s EU Presidency, external migration and EU deals with third countries.
European Commission presents Joint Implementation Plan for the Pact on Migration and Asylum
The Migration and Asylum Pact was approved by the European Parliament on 10 April after years of complex negotiations between political groups and EU countries. On 14 May 2024, all legislative files of the Pact were adopted and published in the Official Journal on 22 May.[1] Following this historic agreement, the Commission has started translating the legislative acts into operational reality over the next two years. The Joint Implementation Plan adopted by the Commission sets out key milestones that will enable Member States to develop the necessary legal and operational capacity by mid-2026. It serves as a template for national implementation plans, which Member States must adopt by the end of the year. The Plan consists of ten interdependent building blocks that will be implemented in parallel.
The building blocks include, among others, developing a common migration and asylum information system, managing external borders, ensuring adequate reception standards, streamlining asylum procedures and ensuring efficient return procedures. The Commission’s Plan also ensures a stable sharing of responsibilities across the Union, establishes a permanent solidarity mechanism and focuses on preparedness and crisis response. Further key elements include stronger safeguards for vulnerable people, increased efforts to resettle migrants, inclusion and integration.
The Plan also emphasises the importance of working with partner countries on the fight against migrant smuggling, effective returns and legal pathways. The next steps are to present the Joint Implementation Plan to the Home Affairs Council, after which it will guide Member States in drawing up their national implementation plans by December 2024.
Entry into force of the Pact regulations
As these are regulations with direct effect, the instruments can only enter into force on the official date of application (i.e. 1 July 2026), even if they have entered into force earlier. Early implementation by Member States before the official date could lead to legal differences between
Member States, which undermines the aim of harmonisation. In practice, this means that as long as the official date of application has not yet been reached, the existing EU legislation in that area remains in force.
Conference of the Meijers Committee and the Dutch Council for Refugees on the Migration Pact
On 26 September 2024, the Meijers Committee and the Dutch Council for Refugees will organise a conference entitled “Unveiling the EU Asylum and Migration Pact: implementation at European and national level”. The aim of the conference is to inform policy makers at EU and national level, academics, NGOs and other relevant stakeholders and to stimulate a discussion on how the Pact will be implemented in the Netherlands, but also in other EU Member States.
Hungary’s EU presidency to start on 1 July 2024
In July, Hungary began its six-month rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union, which will run until December 2024. Hungary has pledged to act as an “honest broker” despite widespread concerns about what critics see as an authoritarian, Russia-friendly government.
Hungarian President Victor Orban has often clashed with Brussels overrule of law and human rights issues. European leaders criticized him on 5 July 2024 for his visit to Russia to meet President Vladimir Putin, accusing him of “shaking hands with a bloody dictator” and abusing the EU presidency to create confusion.
In our previous commentary of May 2023, the Meijers Committee discussed whether, and under what conditions, a Member State such as Hungary can exercise the Presidency in line with established legal and policy requirements while falling under Article 7(1) TEU and while facing rule-of-law related suspensions of EU funding. The Meijers Committee proposes three ways to prevent and/or mitigate conflicts of interest during the Hungarian Presidency: 1) partial delegation of Presidency tasks between the Troika Member States; 2) postponement of the Presidency by making use of existing legal and policy options; 3) formulation of certain conditions by the European Council for when a Member State with rule-of-law problems (e.g. controlled under Article 7 TEU or subject to budgetary rule-of-law conditions) resumes the Presidency of the Council.
With regard to asylum and migration in particular, the Hungarian Presidency will pay particular attention to the external dimension of migration, including efficient cooperation with relevant third countries, more effective return procedures, and innovative solutions to asylum rules. Moreover, during the follow-up of the implementation of the annual priorities of the Schengen cycle, Hungarians will emphasise the importance of protecting external borders and underline the need for EU funds for this purpose.
In June 2024, the European Court of Justice (hereinafter: ECJ) sentenced Hungary to pay a fine of €200 million for the country’s long-term restrictions on asylum. In addition, Hungary must pay an additional €1 million for each day of delay. This money will be automatically taken from Hungary’s share of the EU budget, parts of which are still frozen due to similar problems.
EU external migration
The European Commission is exploring innovative solutions to tackle illegal immigration, with a particular focus on outsourcing asylum procedures, as proposed by 15 countries in May 2024. In a letter to EU Member States, European Commission President Urzula von der Leyen writes that agreement on the pact is just the beginning of exploring available EU instruments. Many Member States are considering innovative strategies to address asylum applications further away from the EU’s external borders. These ideas deserve the attention of the European Commission in the next institutional cycle.
Von der Leyen also mentions new forms of cooperation with safe third countries, as set out in the new Asylum Procedures Regulation. She indicates that efforts in this context could be focused on migration routes to promote these models. By implementing the UNHCR and IOM route-based strategy, the EU can help set up effective national asylum systems in partner countries and improve cooperation on the return of persons to their countries of origin, including reintegration initiatives for those returning.
In addition, the use of migration for political purposes by Russia at the Finnish border and Belarus at the Polish, Latvian and Lithuanian borders is mentioned and the need to strengthen the EU legal framework to respond adequately from a migration and security perspective.
Finally, the Commission focuses on the ‘Pact’ and agreements with third countries such as Tunisia, Mauritania and Egypt. This year, illegal border crossings on the Central Mediterranean route have decreased by 60% and on the Western Balkans route by 72%. No new boats have arrived in Cyprus since May. This proves the effectiveness of the EU’s targeted efforts. However, the increased arrivals via the Western Mediterranean, the Atlantic and the Eastern Mediterranean show that vigilance remains necessary, especially during the summer months, the European Commission states.
For more information on the EU Action Plan on Migration and Asylum, you can consult the latest Official Journal by the European Court of Auditors.
EU funding linked to controversial desert migrant expulsions
A recent investigation by the journalistic collective Lighthouse Report has revealed that the EU has been indirectly involved in mass expulsions of migrants to desert areas in Tunisia, Mauritania and Morocco. The investigation shows that expulsions are a systematic phenomenon, and similar practices can be found in Morocco and Mauritania, where EU-funded police forces have detained and expelled migrants to remote desert areas.
The EU has acknowledged the existence of these expulsions but maintains that responsibility lies with its partner countries. Furthermore, the EU continues to fund security operations that contribute to these violations, even though it claims to uphold human rights principles. The European Commission stresses that it expects its partners to comply with their international obligations while working to improve the conditions of migrants.
Recent CJEU judgments on asylum law
In recent months, the CJEU has significantly shaped EU asylum law through a series of landmark judgments. These judgments have expanded the interpretations under the Directive on eligibility for refugee status or subsidiary protection. For example, there have been important landmark judgments regarding women qualifying as a ‘special social group’ under refugee status due to issues such as domestic violence (Case C-621/21) and advocacy for gender equality (Case C-646/21).
Finnish government’s draft law on instrumentalisation of migrants
Despite concerns from human rights organisations, the Finnish parliament’s Constitutional Law Committee has approved the Finnish bill on the expulsion of migrants. It was approved by a majority of 15 to 2, with only the GreenLeft/Left alliance members of the committee voting against.
The draft law gives Finnish authorities the power to deny entry or expel migrants if there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a foreign state is using them to influence Finland and endanger the country’s sovereignty or national security. The measure, which will last for a maximum of one month, prevents migrants from applying for international protection. There are exceptions, but these are only made in limited cases, such as for vulnerable people or those who are at risk of serious harm if they are returned to their country of origin. However, in cases of violent or mass entry, authorities can deny entry without individual assessment.
The law has been controversial and legal experts have stated that it violates Finland’s international obligations. The Council of Europe recently published a letter urging Finland to reject the draft law.
EU-Egypt Follow-up Agreement
On 17 March 2024, EU leaders and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi signed the EU-Egypt Strategic Partnership, which includes €7.4 billion in grants and loans until 2027. The first milestone, an investment conference in Cairo on 29-30 June, was attended by high-level participants, including European Commission President von der Leyen and Egyptian President Sisi.
During the conference, the EU signed key contracts and a Memorandum of Understanding for €1 billion in macro-financial assistance to Egypt. This partnership also includes EU investments in migration and border control, despite reports of arbitrary detentions and forced returns of Sudanese refugees by Egyptian authorities, including EU-funded forces.
Amnesty International, together with 15 Egyptian and international human rights organisations, presented a so-called three-point guide to the European Commission and Member States. The Guide aims to ensure that EU macro-financial assistance to Egypt is consistent with international and EU law and delivers concrete, measurable, structural and time-bound progress and reforms in the area of human rights.
Member States urge tougher asylum policies
Fifteen EU Member States have called for tougher asylum policies, with the aim of streamlining the transfer of undocumented migrants to third countries, including those rescued at sea. The letter, dated 15 May 2024, is addressed to senior officials of the European Commission and is supported by Denmark, Bulgaria, Czechia, Estonia, Greece, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Romania and Finland. The statement reflects a broad political consensus and proposes to transfer some asylum tasks to neighbouring countries.
The four-page statement calls for “comprehensive, mutually beneficial and sustainable partnerships” with countries along migration routes, similar to existing EU deals with Turkey, Tunisia and Egypt, which involve significant EU funding in exchange for stricter border controls.
The signatories propose to build on a protocol between Italy and Albania, which allows Rome to outsource up to 36,000 asylum applications to Albania each year. Unlike the EU’s deals with Tunisia and Egypt, this protocol includes the transfer of asylum seekers, which remains controversial and has been criticised by several NGOs.
The signatories include Italy and Greece, which are the main gateways for many migrants who attempt the perilous Mediterranean crossing to escape poverty, war or persecution.
Human rights organisations call on EU to protect right to asylum and rule of law
Ahead of the first plenary session of the newly elected European Parliament, more than 90 human rights and humanitarian organisations are calling on the new European Union to stand up resolutely for the right to asylum and the rule of law.
Amnesty International, the Danish Refugee Council, Human Rights Watch and Oxfam are among the organisations that are deeply concerned about recent attempts by several EU countries to avoid or ‘outsource’ their international legal responsibilities by moving asylum procedures and refugee protection to countries outside the EU. According to the NGOs, these controversial proposals threaten the fundamental principle of international protection: that people under a jurisdiction have the right to seek asylum in that jurisdiction and have their claim assessed fairly.
Transparency issues within the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex)
Despite the recent appointment of a pro-transparency leadership in Frontex, transparency issues in the agency’s practices remain present. Most recently, an increase has been recorded in regards to complaints submitted to the European Ombudsman (EO), especially relating to the agency’s lack of compliance with Freedom of Information (FOI) requests (see for instance cases OI/4/2022/PB, 1129/2023/OAM, and 1259/2024/NH).
Frontex has been criticised for delaying FOI requests through superfluous follow-up questions, a tactic the EO condemned in May 2023. In furtherance, the agency continued its attempts to justify these delays in its internal correspondence with the Ombudsman, which the latter found “disheartening”.
While some improvements have been made, including faster processing and better negotiation tactics, critics argue that Frontex’s overall transparency efforts remain insufficient. The agency’s public document register is described as user-unfriendly, and there are concerns that Frontex’s culture still prioritises protecting its own interests over genuine transparency.
[1] Revised Reception Conditions Directive 2024/1346 (RCD), Qualification Regulation (EU) 2024/1347 (QR), Asylum Procedure Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 (APR), Return Border Procedure Regulation (EU) 2024/1349 (RBPR), Asylum and Migration Management Regulation 2024/1351 (AMMR), Screening Regulation (EU) 2024/1356 (SR), and Crisis Regulation (EU) 2024/1359 (CR), available at:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/oj/daily-view/L-series/default.html?&ojDate=22052024
