The Attitude And Practice Of The EU Member States In Relation To The Dublin System

The Attitude And Practice Of The EU Member States In Relation To The Dublin System Presented by: Dr. Frumarová Date: 19 October 2023 Dublin System – Research Areas And Questions - What is the attitude and practice of the EU member states in relation to the Dublin system? - Is the Dublin system functional? What are its fundamental shortcomings? - How is the reform of the Dublin system going? Eurodac - Immediate identification of applicants for international protection and detained persons is essential for the functioning of the Dublin system. Fingerprinting is an important element in establishing the exact identity of persons, especially due to the occurrence of false travel documents or when refugees travel to Europe without documents. Fingerprints are not easily interchangeable and influenced by, for example, aging or disease, and are often used in biometric systems due to the simplicity and speed of their acquisition. - The Eurodac system is currently regulated by Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council (EU) no. 603/2013. - This is a central database of fingerprint data linked to the electronic means of the Member States. This system collects, stores, exchanges and compares the fingerprints of asylum seekers. The purpose of establishing this system is to facilitate the implementation of the Dublin system with the aim of preventing multiple applications for asylum in several member states under different names. Major Shortcomings, Reform Efforts - The need for a fundamental reform of the Dublin system has been discussed for many years, and the various refugee crises have only highlighted the fact that the system is dysfunctional. - The practice whereby the state of first arrival has most often been responsible for the asylum application has placed a burden on coastal states in particular (i.e. states at the EU's borders, notably Greece and Italy). As a result, these states not only lacked sufficient facilities for the increased number of asylum seekers, but also prolonged decision-making procedures, leading to migrants trying to travel illegally within the EU. - Many Member States inform applicants only in general or the information is out of date. Regarding the family ties criterion, it was found that different Member States use substantially different evidence for these criteria. - Although all Member States have jointly introduced judicial remedies and set a reasonable time limit for lodging a remedy, the "reasonable time limit" has varied significantly from country to country. - Therefore, the first attempt at reform was in 2016 a proposal for the so-called Dublin IV regulation. The most significant changes proposed compared to Dublin III were: • (a) Establishment of a collective redistribution mechanism: If a country is faced with a disproportionate number of asylum applications above a set benchmark, all new applicants in that country (regardless of nationality) will be redistributed across the EU until the number of applications falls below the benchmark again. • b) Creation of a special pre-procedure: when examining an application, a Member State has the obligation (not only the possibility) to check whether the applicant comes from a so-called "safe third country" or has already applied for asylum in another country. If so, the applicant is returned to that country. • c) Introducing a new obligation for applicants for international protection to remain in the Member State responsible for their application (together with appropriate consequences for non-compliance). • d) Shorter time limits for sending relocation requests, for replies and for carrying out relocations of asylum seekers between Member States. • e) Greater safeguards for unaccompanied minors, broadening the definition of family members. - In June 2018, the European Council stated that there is still no consensus on the reform of the Dublin Regulation. Dublin IV was not adopted. - In September 2020 the European Commission presented a new Pact on Migration and Asylum, based on in-depth consultations with a multiplicity of state and non-state stakeholders. It is a set of nine legislative and non-legislative measures that relate to EU asylum and migration policies and primarily target the area of irregular migration. - The main goal of this reform is, through a set of proposals, to create a common framework for a comprehensive approach to the management of migration and asylum, or to increase the efficiency of this system and achieve greater resistance to migration pressures. It also focuses on the elimination or at least the minimization of factors that encourage migration and, subsequently, secondary movements. Last but not least, it aims to combat the abuse of the current system and better support the most affected E member states. - Key from the point of view of the Dublin system is the Asylum and Migration Management Regulation (AMMR). This legislative proposal was created in 2020 and aims to replace the Dublin Regulation, which has proven to be dysfunctional. - However, the changes in relation to the Dublin III regulation are minimal, as the AMMR only adds a few new criteria for the relocation of asylum seekers. The main innovation = the solidarity mechanism, which is supposed to be mandatory, as it requires all member states to share in the responsibility, but also flexible, as states can choose from several variants of solidarity, e.g. relocation, sponsoring returns or other forms of matching contributions. In practice, it can subsequently look like that when a person arrives, the state of first entry still initiates the Dublin procedure to determine the state responsible for his application. Most often, the State of first entry will remain responsible throughout, however, if that State is under pressure, other Member States are expected to support it by relocating asylum seekers and refugees to their territory, sponsoring returns or providing financial and operational resources. This mechanism is quite contentious across states. - With the active work of the French and the Czech Presidencies of the Council of the EU and under the coordination of the European Commission, considerable progress was made in 2022 toward advancing the reform package. Agreement was also reached by 21 countries on the implementation of the Voluntary Solidarity Mechanism, paving the way for further progress on the Asylum and Migration Management Regulation. The mechanism, which is voluntary and spans 1 year, provides for expressions of solidarity to Member States experiencing particular pressure in their asylum and reception systems through relocations, financial contributions and other measures of support. - In September 2022 the European Parliament and the rotating Presidencies of the Council of the EU reached political agreement on a joint roadmap for negotiations between co-legislators in order to adopt the legislative proposals before the end of the 2019-2024 legislative period, that is, by February 2024. - The roadmap provides the framework for negotiations on the Eurodac, the Screening, the Asylum and Migration Management, Crisis and Force Majeure and the Asylum Procedures Regulations and for finalizing the Union Resettlement Framework, the recast Reception Conditions Directive (RCD) and the recast Qualification Directive (QD), for which provisional agreements have been previously reached between the European Parliament and the Council. The roadmap also provides new impetus for reaching an agreement on the proposal for a recast Return Directive. Following agreement on the roadmap, in December 2022 the European Parliament and the Council reached an agreement on reception conditions for applicants for international protection. - June 2023 - Council of EU reaches agreement on key asylum and migration laws • The Council took a decisive step towards a modernisation of the EU's rulebook for asylum and migration. It agreed on a negotiating position on the asylum procedure regulation and on the asylum and migration management regulation. This position will form the basis of negotiations by the Council presidency with the European Parliament. - Modification of Dublin rules: • „The asylum and migration management regulation (AMMR) should replace, once agreed, the current Dublin regulation. Dublin sets out rules determining which member state is responsible for the examination of an asylum application. The AMMR will streamline these rules and shorten time limits. For example, the current complex take back procedure aimed at transferring an applicant back to the member state responsible for his or her application will be replaced by a simple take back notification." - New solidarity mechanism • To balance the current system whereby a few member states are responsible for the vast majority of asylum applications, a new solidarity mechanism is being proposed. The new rules combine mandatory solidarity with flexibility for member states as regards the choice of the individual contributions. These contributions include relocation, financial contributions or alternative solidarity measures such as deployment of personnel or measures focusing on capacity building. Member states have full discretion as to the type of solidarity they contribute. No member state will ever be obliged to carry out relocations. • There will be a minimum annual number for relocations from member states where most persons enter the EU to member states less exposed to such arrivals. This number is set at 30 000, while the minimum annual number for financial contributions will be fixed at €20 000 per relocation. These figures can be increased where necessary and situations where no need for solidarity is foreseen in a given year will also be taken into account. - The AMMR also contains measures aimed at preventing abuse by the asylum seeker and avoiding secondary movements. The regulation for instance sets obligations for asylum seekers to apply in the member states of first entry or legal stay. It discourages secondary movements by limiting the possibilities for the cessation or shift of responsibility between member states and thus reduces the possibilities for the applicant to chose the member state where they submit their claim. - While the new regulation should preserve the main rules on determination of responsibility, the agreed measures include modified time limits for its duration: • The member state of first entry will be responsible for the asylum application for a duration of two years • When a country wants to transfer a person to the member state which is actually responsible for the migrant and this person absconds (e.g. When the migrant goes into hiding to evade a transfer) responsibility will shift to the transferring member state after three years • If a member state rejects an applicant in the border procedure, its responsibility for that person will end after 15 months (in case of a renewed application)