EU migration, asylum and security PDF

Historical Background 1975 Trevi Group: Informal cooperation among member states to tackle cross-border terrorism, organized crime, and trafficking. - TREVI: Terrorisme, Radicalism, Extremism, Violence International. - Non-binding consultations outside treaty frameworks. - Laid the groundwork for st...

Historical Background 1975 Trevi Group: Informal cooperation among member states to tackle cross-border terrorism, organized crime, and trafficking. - TREVI: Terrorisme, Radicalism, Extremism, Violence International. - Non-binding consultations outside treaty frameworks. - Laid the groundwork for structures as JHA, Europol, Maastricht Treaty and the Schengen Agreement, these could happen because of the protection Trevi covered → Policing on a supranational level. 1986 Schengen Agreement: Removed internal borders within the EU by creating shared external border policies. - Introduced the Schengen Information System (SIS) for data sharing. - Visa policy standardized EU-wide. - Established that asylum applications are handled by the first country of entry. → Works for the entirety of EU MS → Removes workload for MS Milestones Maastricht Treaty (1992): Created the third pillar (CJHA) for intergovernmental cooperation. - Key issues: asylum, immigration, counter-terrorism, organized crime, asylum and immigration. - Decision-making: JHA Council required unanimity; limited roles for the Commission, EP, and CJEU. - Non-binding policy instruments. Amsterdam Treaty (1997): Renamed CJHA (justice and home affairs) to AFSJ (Area of freedom, Security, and Justice) - Transferred aspects like immigration, asylum, and civil judicial cooperation to the first pillar, increasing supranational governance. - Proposals now come from the European commission. - European Parliament gained more involvement → giving citizens more representatives a say in these policies - Schengen incorporated into EU law. - Criminal matters remained intergovernmental (third pillar). Tampere Summit (1999): Introduced the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). - Discussed the future direction of CJHA (third pillar), focusing on commitments to freedom of movement, convergence of judicial systems, and better migration management through the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). - It also emphasized tackling racism and xenophobia, deterring human trafficking, and linking CJHA to foreign policy and development aid to address root causes of migration. (ex. helping neighboring countries develop so people wouldn’t feel the need to migrate) European Judicial Area - Mutual recognition of judicial decisions. (ex. A court ruling in Germany on a business dispute can be enforced in France without reopening the case) - Information exchange for prosecutions (ex. sharing data about a suspect wanted in one country so they can be apprehended in another. - Eurojust created (→ Tampere), assisting national investigations of organized crime. - European Police College → Training of supranational police and law enforcement. - European Arrest Warrant (ex. a suspect wanted for fraud in Spain can be arrested from Germany within weeks, rather than months or years) Hague Programme (2004): Focused on combating terrorism and securing external borders. - Established Frontex securing borders (European Border and Coast Guard Agency). - Promotes intelligence sharing and analysis of terrorist threats through SitCen. - Partnership with (non-eu) countries of origin/transit → addressing migration at the root and ensuring migrants could be returned to their home countries efficiently. - Conclusion of further readmission agreements. Lisbon Treaty (2009): Abolished the pillar structure. - Expanded CJEU jurisdiction over all areas of AFSJ (pillar III). - Commission right of co-initiative alongside MS. - EP gained co-legislative power under OLP (Ordinary Legislative Procedure). - Strengthened internal security strategy against organized crime and terrorism. - Integrated border management. (Frontex) → Balancing security with free movement. Challenges to Schengen - Increased migration pressures: - Western Balkans (economic migration). - Arab Spring (political unrest). - 2015 migration crisis (refugees from Syria, Afghanistan, Africa). - Temporary reinstatement of internal border controls. - Resistance Eastern European countries (Hungary & Poland) to relocation quotas. - Overburdened frontline states (Greece & Italy). - UNHCR (United Nation Commissioner for Refugees) and IOM (International Organisation for Migration) involvement, but inadequate because of limited authority, capacity challenges, lack of integration within EU policies. External implications of the AFSJ - Not meant to be an independent external policy - External counter-terrorism cooperation, linked to CFSP (Common foreign and Security Policy) - Conclusion of agreements with third countries, especially re-admission agreements, which is a precondition of visa liberalisation (no visa required) with the EU. - Europol, Eurojust and Frontex sign agreements with third countries. (ex. intelligence sharing, joint operations against crime) - EP consent required in these agreements, EP has a strong role approving agreements with third countries, particularly those related to: re-admission, visa liberalization and security cooperation → this ensures that such agreements respect EU values, such as human rights and democratic accountability). Migration Crisis (2015) A large-scale crisis predominantly involving refugees from Syria, Afghanistan, and Africa. National border checks were reinstated, relying heavily on member states' capacities for asylum processing and control. Despite the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), the Dublin Convention placed primary responsibility on countries of first entry, leading to strain on frontline states like Greece and Italy. Migration policies aimed to balance human rights protection with operational measures, such as saving lives at sea and combating smugglers through NATO maritime operations. - Dublin Convention: Determines responsibility for asylum applications, focusing on the first country of entry. → Aims to avoid asylum shopping (multiple applications in different countries), but it doesn’t include burden sharing mechanisms between MS - Common European Asylum System (CEAS): Standardizes asylum procedures and quality across the EU. (conditions of procedures of minimum standards). EU’s Agenda on migration (2015) Combines supranational and intergovernmental approaches: - Strengthened Frontex → Manage and secure external borders during a crisis. - Reform of Dublin Regulation with a fairness mechanism for relocation. → Responsibility for asylum claims to the first country entry → ensure fairness. - Hotspots established in Italy and Greece with an EU presence. → Screening operations for migrants in these countries. - Coordinating return procedures: Return Directive for repatriation of migrants. → outline rules for the return of irregular migrants (those not granted asylum) to their countries in a humane and efficient way. - Asylum Procedures Directive → common standards for asylum to ensure: fairness, efficiency and protection of asylum seekers. - Reception Conditions Directive → the minimum standard for the reception of asylum seekers in EU countries, including healthcare, housing, food, access to education or employment for asylum seekers while their claims are processed. (ex. migrant kids going to school). Intergovernmental Aspects of EU Agenda on Migration - EU-Turkey Deal (2016): Aimed to reduce irregular migration through resettlement. → Migration flows from the middle east, Turkey agreed to take back migrants in return of aid and acceleration of visa liberalization for Turkish nationals - Trust Funds: - Africa Trust Fund → funding to address the root causes of migration - EU Regional Trust Fund for Syrian Crisis. → Humanitarian aid and development assistance. - EU collaboration with North Africa: Built reception centers in exchange for aid and trade benefits. → To manage migration flows before migrants reach Europe in return for financial support. - Clause of readmission into trade agreements with former colonies. → Trade agreements with non-EU countries (often former colonies) requiring these countries to accept the return of their nationals who entered the EU irregularly - Addressing the causes of displacement of persons → EU works to address the root causes of migration (ex. poverty, conflict and instability, climate change) → so that people can stay in their home countries. Safe Country Concept A country is deemed safe if it ensures democracy, human rights, and no persecution, torture, or armed conflict (based on Geneva Convention and EU Asylum Procedures Directive). → kind of like the EU. Potential EU MS must comply with the Copenhagen criteria to ensure democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for protection of minorities. Candidates of EU memberships are thus usually safe. Safe Country Lists: - No formal EU-wide list yet → member states rely on national lists. - The EU is working on harmonized lists with the EP and Commission. MS can propose additions, but if a country is removed from the list, they must accept. List based on reception of applications. New Pact on Migration (2020) The New Pact on Migration (2020) balances responsibility and solidarity among member states. Member state solidarity: 50% on population, 50% on GDP (larger and wealthier countries take on more migrants and refugees). Each MS contributes by choosing 1 of 3: 1. Take in relocated refugees. 2. Sponsor measures for integration, such as schooling or healthcare. 3. Sponsor returns: - Return Mechanisms: Voluntary Returns, encouraging migrants to return to their home voluntarily, and Readmission Agreements, agreements with third countries to ensure they accept the return of their nationals who entered the EU irregularly. - Removal operations coordinated by Frontex: Forced return.