Five Years after: European Migration and Asylum Policy Still in Crisis

RESPOND Panel Review WEB.png

by Sabine Hess, Bernd Kasparek, Jelka Günther | University of Gottingen

Shortly after the 5th anniversary of the events in the summer months of 2015, when the March of Hope of refugees and migrants from Budapest to the Austrian border went down in history as the so-called European “refugee crisis”, the panel (Five Years after: The European Refugee Crisis and the Political Response” /RESPOND final conference) brought together high-level policy makers, practitioners and researchers to discuss how the European Union and its member states have since adapted their migration and asylum policies and implementations of border controls.

Even though there was broad agreement on the “toxic” character of the migration issue with regard to the EU’s cohesion – acknowledging a policy crisis for the European Union (EU) and a crisis of solidarity among its member states – the discussion revealed a fundamental discrepancy on how to assess the requirements for a way forward in the deadlocked debate on migration and asylum in the EU. Whereas policy makers of the European Commission and the German Federal Ministry of Interior conceded deficiencies in the past but stressed progress made with regard to a well managed migration system, representatives of humanitarian and nongovernmental organization such as Pro Asyl and UNHCR, which closely monitor the situation at the external borders, deplore ongoing violations of human rights as well as of international and European law.

At stake was the question if the The New Pact on Migration and Asylum as presented by the European Commission end of September 2020 will bring a major breakthrough in finding solutions to the governance failures that became apparent after 2015 – or, to put it with EU Commission’s Vice-President Margaritis Schinas – if the EU is failing twice on migration.

According to Francisco Gazetlu-Mezquiriz (Head of the Irregular Migration and Return Policy Unit at DG Migration and Home Affairs of the European Commission) the pact allows for a regularization of migration, combining a fair procedure to those in need of protection with a “strong return system”. It therefore not only creates an enabling environment for solidarity and responsibility among EU member states but also a “win-win” partnership with third countries. In line with this, Ulrich Weinbrenner (Head of the Directorate General for Migration, Refugees and Return Policy at the German Federal Ministry of the Interior) stressed the strong political commitment not to again allow a loss of control over the central element of sovereignty – i.e. who may enter a country – and claims a professionalization in relocation efforts at the Greek islands.

Martin Rentsch (spokesperson for UNHCR Germany) contradicted this position vehemently:  even in global comparison the situation in Greece is still unacceptable. Although assessing as positive that the pact is bringing things in motion, e.g. with regard to enhancing search and rescue or the predictability of disembarkment, he still misses an uncompromising justice and rights based approach towards asylum procedures. Even if the new pact speaks a more positive language, said Karl Kopp (Director of European Affairs of PRO ASYL), it disregards fair procedures at the external borders where asylum claims may be processed without any access to independent lawyers or counsel. In particular with regard to the numerous illegal but well-documented pushbacks, the pact fails to introduce a robust monitoring mechanism to enforce border controls by border police and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency FRONTEX to be in compliance with fundamental rights obligations.

Pointing out this fundamental discrepancy between policy and implementation which became very obvious throughout the panel discussion, Gesine Schwan (president of the HUMBOLDT-VIADRINA Governance Platform) concluded that the European migration and asylum policy will remain in crisis as long as this root cause will not be addressed. Instead, she proposed a set of new solutions that should be based on solidarity, justice and voluntary cooperation based in already existing municipal and urban initiatives that demonstrate how such an approach can address both newcomers as well as citizens of the EU.