Does The Change In Attitude Towards Migrations

Does The Change In Attitude Towards Migrations Mean The End Of Schengen Presented by: Prof. Dr. STANIČIĆ Date: 6 May 2024 MIGRATIONS AND THEIR IMPACT - Migrations are a phenomenon which originates in the time of making of mankind. It is all present, continuous and unstoppable. - However, they are beginning to be the foremost challenge for western countries that can be called the countries that attract immigrants. - We are now in the fourth phase of migrations in Europe after the Syrian crisis and the subsequent deluge of migrants coming to Europe via Turkey and other migration routes. - Consequently, there is a sharp change if attitude of EU citizens towards migrations and migrants. - It is necessary to protect migrants in need of protection and ensure that they have access to the asylum system. - At the same time, it is necessary to protect the EU outer border and to ensure that it functions as a barrier for those who do not meet the prescribed conditions for entry and do not meet the conditions to become an asylum seeker. - The answer to this should be the Schengen rules and the common European asylum system. - • But: "Schengen had come to epitomize freedom, security, and European success" (2005). - “Schengen is not working" (2023). - During the Syrian crisis -,the Dublin system does not work" - Commission suggests the reform of the CEAS in 2016. - Commission issued its Communication on a new Pact on Migration and Asylum in 2020. - Council agreed on the Pact in 2023. However - legislature is yet to be drafted. Attitude Towards Migrations And Integration Of Migrants Of Citizens Of The EU - Around 5% of the EU's total population are third country nationals. - Immigration is seen as the most important issue facing the EU (Eurobarometer 2017) - Eurobarometer survey "Integration of Immigrants in the European Union,, (2022): Half of Europeans agree that integration of migrants is successful in their city or local area, while slightly less (42%) think the same about integration in their country. Just over half of Europeans (53%) agree that their national government is doing enough to promote the integration of migrants into society. A clear majority (69%) of respondents agree that it is necessary for their country to invest in integrating migrants. EUROPE WITHOUT BORDERS - The project of establishing an area without internal borders has been at the core of European integration since the Treaty of Rome. - Almost 420 million people can cross the internal borders of 27 European countries. - The Schengen Borders Code (SBC) regulates the functioning of the "borderless area". Member states have abolished internal border controls and relocated border enforcement to the external border and other ports of entry (e.g. airports). - Normal functioning of Schengen was usually taken for granted and as maintaining the absence of border controls. CRISIS AS LITMUS TESTS - It was widely accepted that, even in the case of a massive influx of migrants, Schengen could be maintained through the strict application of its working provisions. - However, migrations showed their detrimental effect of the concept of "borderless Europe" as early as 2011 (French-Italian controversy). - Reintroduction of border controls. - From 2004-2015 Member States reintroduced border controls a total of 40 times. - September 2015 - October 2020 - this number rose to 237. - 2022 State of Schengen Report - border controls between Schengen states have been reintroduced more than 280 times since September 2015. BORDER CONTROLS ON INNER BORDERS - French authorities decided to reinforce controls at its southeast border with Italy in June 2015. - In September 2015, Germany, Austria, Denmark, Sweden and Norway decided to reintroduce checks at internal borders - thus prompting the “Schengen crisis". - Schengen area in the period 2015-2021 has seen persistent border checks at internal borders in six Member States (France, Austria, Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Norway), that repeatedly prolonged these border checks due to different threats (migration, terrorism, shortcomings at the external borders). CJEU RULING - The CJEU ruled, in April 2022, that Article 25(4) of SBC must be interpreted as precluding border control at internal borders from being temporarily reintroduced by a Member State on the basis of Articles 25 and 27 of that code where the duration of its reintroduction exceeds the maximum total duration of six months, set in Article 25(4), and no new threat exists that would justify applying afresh the periods provided for in Article 25. - Also, it ruled that Article 25(4) of SBC must be interpreted as precluding national legislation by which a Member State obliges person, on pain of a penalty, to present a passport or identity card on entering the territory of that Member State via an internal border, when the reintroduction of the internal border control in relation to which that obligation is imposed is contrary to that provision. HOWEVER - Member States extend border controls notwithstanding the cited judgement of the Court, and the Commission is not opening infringement procedures. - The Commission proposed amendments od the SBC in 2021. - The Commission detected two main problems in the Schengen area: 1) border checks at internal borders which are long-lasting and applied against an abstract threat or used as a first aid measure and 2) discrepancies in the application of the measures at the external borders. - Reintroduction of border control in 2024: - • Italy - Slovenia • Cheech Republic - Slovakia • Poland Slovakia Reintroduction of border control from 2023 extending to 2024: • Slovenia Croatia & Hungary • Germany Austria, Poland, Cheech Republic & Switzerland • Austria Cheech Republic • Austria - Slovakia, Slovenia, Hungary • Denmark-Germany • Norway - ports with ferry connections to the Schengen area • Sweden-all internal borders • France all internal borders DOES THIS MEAN THE END OF SCHENGEN AS WE KNOW IT? - The change in migration influx into the EU showed, as early as 2011, that Schengen area is highly vulnerable and that the joint trust of Member States is very fragile. - Schengen member states, always kept a firm grip on issues of border controls and national security, which touch upon the very core of national sovereignty. - The phenomenon of the mechanism of reoccurring reestablishment of border controls at inner borders is obviously the reaction of Member States to the problems that are occurring on the external border, which is, in their opinion, not performing its function. WHAT THE ABOLITION OF CONTROLS AT INTERNAL BORDERS MEAN? - Abolition of controls at internal borders does not mean that the EU, as a legal space, constitutes an abstract and borderless space which, in contrast to Member States' legal orders, is not based on territory. - The abolition of internal border controls goes hand in hand with the establishment and fortification of a common external border and, thus, constitutes a common bounded space that is more than the mere sum of Member States territories. - This means that the external border must provide sufficient security that the Member States do not feel their national security endangered by the lack of border controls on the inner borders. - It is obvious that the EU migration policy had undergone a change in the past 20 years towards increasing "securitization", and, in this discourse, migration has turned into "risk management". IS THERE A SOLUTION? - Sovereignty is a very complex phenomenon which can be strengthened and restricted simultaneously. - Schengen rules can be a tool for ensuring the rule of law while protecting the right to asylum in individual cases. It just needs to be fine-tuned and the Member States are responsible for its implementation in a proper manner. - Schengen lays on the notion of mutual trust of Member States. Inner Member States must be able to trust the external Member States that they will adequately protect the external border. - When and if this comes to pass, then there (again) be absolutely no reason to keep the now in place inner border controls, which is in the interest of all Member States