The Council of the European Union Adopts New Pact on Migration and Asylum 

By Sohini Chakrabarti, News Editor of The Graduate Press

This Tuesday, on May 14th,  the European Council adopted a landmark reform of the EU asylum and migration system. This is a watershed moment that had proved stubbornly elusive for a decade. The Pact  establishes a set of rules that are meant to help manage arrivals in an orderly way, create efficient and uniform procedures, and ensure fair burden sharing among member states. Among other things, the New Pact envisions stricter rules to expand the screening of applicants, carry out health and security checks, speed up examination procedures and provide counselling free of charge. Its main novelty is a system of “mandatory solidarity” that would give governments three options to manage asylum seekers: relocate a certain number, pay €20,000 for each one they reject, or finance operational support. The initial goal is to have 30,000 relocations per year. 

Poland and Hungary, with their anti-immigrant leadership, were the most ardent critics and voted against the entire package of legislation. Since the reform was presented in 2020, the two have consistently resisted the system of “mandatory solidarity,” falsely claiming it would force them to accept migrants against their will. The Czech Republic and Slovakia, two sceptics, chose to abstain in the majority of files, while Austria voted against the Crisis Regulation. However, the New Pact needed a qualified majority so it successfully moved forward and was formally ratified, sealing one of the greatest accomplishments of the current mandate. For the bloc, the path to the finish line has been all but easy: the idea of having a common, predictable rulebook to handle the irregular arrivals of asylum seekers has been on the table since the 2015-2016 migration crisis, which turned the issue into political dynamite and bitterly split countries into opposing camps.

Southern member states, such as Italy and Spain, complained about being overwhelmed and left alone. Western and northern countries, for example, Germany, demanded stronger accountability and enforcement at the external borders, while eastern states resisted any initiative that resembled a relocation quota. Amid the commotion, far-right forces saw their chance and jumped onto the discourse as a trampoline to relevance and electoral success. The shock waves of that political seism are still felt today, with polls ahead of the June elections predicting a sharp turn to the right. Under a sort of “if not now, when?” mantra, member states overcame their differences and gradually unblocked the five pieces of the New Pact throughout 2023 until they reached a provisional deal with the Parliament in December.

The agreement was narrowly endorsed by Members of the European Parliament in April 2024 following a heated debate that laid bare unresolved ideological discrepancies: lawmakers on the right said the reform was too soft and lenient while lawmakers on the left said it was too harsh and punitive. Humanitarian organisations were also split. Amnesty International denounced the New Pact, warning it would degrade the quality of the asylum process and lead to “greater suffering“. But 22 civil society organisations, including Oxfam, said in a joint statement that it represented a “glimmer of hope” and could provide a coordinated, protection-centred approach to the thorny question of resettlement. The only step left for the New Pact is the publication in the EU’s official journal. After that, it will take two years to enter into full force.

The Geneva Debate, that aims to continue being the city’s preeminent student debate on current affairs and global development, for this year’s edition organised on April 24th 2024, proposed the following motion – “This House Opposes the EU’s New Pact on Migration and Asylum”. In a riveting debate, both sides adeptly presented compelling arguments, showcasing thorough research and persuasive rhetoric. Side proposition, prevailing as the winners, stood firmly against the New Pact, predicting that it will curtail the rights of asylum seekers, migrants and refugees, leaving them in even more precarious conditions due to its substandard procedures, vaguely defined terms and prioritisation of “security” over upholding the human rights paradigm. They argued that this would lead to an increase in detention centres, pushbacks at sea and cruel hand-overs to third countries, rather than dignified reception conditions. As Europe grapples with the complexities of migration, these legislative reforms stand as a nuanced yet contentious endeavour, offering both promise and pitfalls on the challenging road toward a unified and humane approach to migration management. 

Photo credits: Sohini Chakrabarti