Tuesday

26th Mar 2019

Opinion

Migrant relocation ruling raises questions

  • Hungary and Poland have failed to host a single migrant from Greece and Italy under the relocation scheme. (Photo: Stephen Ryan / IFRC)

The decision by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on Wednesday (6 September) to overrule Hungary's and Slovakia's objections to the compulsory EU migrant relocation scheme has coincided with the publication of the European Commission's fifteenth report on relocation and resettlement.

The report confirms that Hungary and Poland have failed to host a single migrant from Greece and Italy under the relocation scheme - followed closely by the Czech Republic, which has only fulfilled 0.4 percent of its legally binding quota, and Slovakia, only 3.5 percent.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Support quality EU news

Get instant access to all articles — and 18 year's of archives. 30 days free trial.

... or join as a group

It has also provided an equally discouraging picture of the implementation of the EU's relocation scheme overall.

The report suggests that - except for Finland, Ireland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta and Sweden - all the remaining member states are still under-performing on their legally binding commitments by at least 50 percent.

Given that the EU relocation scheme, in its current form, is due to end on 26 September, what are some of the key lessons that can be drawn from its implementation to date?

And can they guide the design of any future EU migrant solidarity mechanism?

Questions raised

First of all, it is surprising to note that despite the above figures on the implementation of the EU relocation scheme so far, only a handful of member states have continued to be stigmatised for their failure to meet their obligations.

Is there an objective scale establishing the level below which lack of solidarity in this policy area should be singled out and formally condemned?

The impression is given that - more than the insufficient solidarity expressed throughout most of the EU to date - what is really unsettling the EU executive is the openly defiant and confrontational attitude adopted by a couple of member states, which have expressly announced that they would not implement the legally binding EU migrant quota system.

Second, can the Council Decision establishing the relocation scheme, or any future EU migrant solidarity mechanism, continue to be implemented against the will of the national populations of some of the member states?

According to the opinion of advocate general Yves Bot in the recent ECJ case: "Solidarity is among the cardinal values of the Union and is even among the foundations of the Union".

Not only that, but it is also "the quintessence of what is both the raison d'etre and the objective of the European project".

Against this background, it is difficult to envisage how Hungary and Poland, in particular, could both claim to be members of the European project, thereby adhering to all of its fundamental values, and yet continue to selectively ignore some of its key implementing principles and rules.

Third, can alternative forms of solidarity, such as financial and staff contributions to the strengthening of the surveillance of the external borders of the EU, be considered equivalent to hosting a few hundred migrants? Especially since the EU scheme is based on objective, quantifiable and verifiable distribution criteria?

But if so, how can any such equivalence be defined and measured, and through what legal mechanism can it be implemented?

Again, according to the opinion of the advocate general in the recent ECJ ruling, the surveillance of the EU's external borders, which aims to prevent future irregular migration, can in no way replace a relocation mechanism that is intended to respond to migrant flows, which have already occurred and are already affecting several member states.

Therefore, any contribution to the EU's immigration control systems and operations should be considered complementary to, rather than able to substitute for the member states' legally binding obligations under the EU relocation scheme.

Fourth, if the ECJ were to rule in the coming months that Hungary and Poland are indeed in breach of EU law, would the resulting fines correspond to the costs of contributing to the EU migrant quota system? And therefore, would they influence these countries' resolve in ignoring any future EU migrant solidarity scheme?

EU duty

The EU executive and ECJ have a legal, moral and historic duty to engage in the procedure.

But beyond these duties, should a fairer and more persuasive response not also include depriving these member states of their future benefits under EU structural funds and other assistance packages proportionally to the value of their non-contribution to the legally binding EU migrant solidarity mechanisms?

Many fundamentals relating to the future of EU immigration and asylum policy are due to be discussed in several high-level meetings in the coming weeks and months, including under the impetus of the recently elected French president, Emmanuel Macron.

The questions raised above are no doubt some that will need to be answered in any such discussions.

Solon Ardittis is managing director of Eurasylum and a research fellow at the Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) and at the Global Labor Organization (GLO). He is also co-editor of "Migration Policy Practice", a bimonthly journal published jointly with the International Organization for Migration (IOM).

Poland vows legal battle on migrant quotas

One minister accused Commission of putting a terrorist "noose around Europe's neck", as Poland vowed to see the EU in court on migrant relocations.

Russia and money laundering in Europe

After Danske Bank, both the US and the EU need to abandon the principle in bank regulation that it is all right to be a crook as long as you are big.

News in Brief

  1. May admits 'not sufficient support' for third Brexit vote
  2. Orban vows more EU 'information campaigns'
  3. May 'effectively out of power', says Scottish leader
  4. May under pressure to resign over Brexit endgame
  5. Million march against Brexit, five million sign petition
  6. Italy first G7 country to sign China Belt and Road deal
  7. EU leaders at summit demand more effort on disinformation
  8. Report: Corbyn to meet May on Monday for Brexit talks

Italy should capitalise on Brexit

Now that the UK is leaving, Italy can, and should, step up. It is the third largest country and economy in the EU. Spain and Poland follow, but they are significantly smaller economically and population-wise.

The Magnitsky Act - and its name

It is disappointing that so many MEPs in the Socialist and Green group caved in to Russian interests, in fear of challenging a plutocratic regime, by saying 'no' to naming the Magnitsky legislation by its rightful name: Magnitsky.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersNew campaign: spot, capture and share Traces of North
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersLeading Nordic candidates go head-to-head in EU election debate
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersNew Secretary General: Nordic co-operation must benefit everybody
  4. Platform for Peace and JusticeMEP Kati Piri: “Our red line on Turkey has been crossed”
  5. UNICEF2018 deadliest year yet for children in Syria as war enters 9th year
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic commitment to driving global gender equality
  7. International Partnership for Human RightsMeet your defender: Rasul Jafarov leading human rights defender from Azerbaijan
  8. UNICEFUNICEF Hosts MEPs in Jordan Ahead of Brussels Conference on the Future of Syria
  9. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic talks on parental leave at the UN
  10. International Partnership for Human RightsTrial of Chechen prisoner of conscience and human rights activist Oyub Titiev continues.
  11. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic food policy inspires India to be a sustainable superpower
  12. Nordic Council of MinistersMilestone for Nordic-Baltic e-ID

Latest News

  1. Romania presidency shatters EU line on Jerusalem
  2. The Spitzen process - a coup that was never accepted
  3. Russia and money laundering in Europe
  4. Italy takes China's new Silk Road to the heart of Europe
  5. What EU leaders agreed on climate - and what they mean
  6. Copyright and (another) new Brexit vote This WEEK
  7. EU avoids Brexit crash, sets new date for 12 April
  8. Campaigning commissioners blur the lines

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Counter BalanceEU bank urged to free itself from fossil fuels and take climate leadership
  2. Intercultural Dialogue PlatformRoundtable: Muslim Heresy and the Politics of Human Rights, Dr. Matthew J. Nelson
  3. Platform for Peace and JusticeTurkey suffering from the lack of the rule of law
  4. UNESDASoft Drinks Europe welcomes Tim Brett as its new president
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic ministers take the lead in combatting climate change
  6. Counter BalanceEuropean Parliament takes incoherent steps on climate in future EU investments
  7. International Partnership For Human RightsKyrgyz authorities have to immediately release human rights defender Azimjon Askarov
  8. Nordic Council of MinistersSeminar on disability and user involvement
  9. Nordic Council of MinistersInternational appetite for Nordic food policies
  10. Nordic Council of MinistersNew Nordic Innovation House in Hong Kong
  11. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Region has chance to become world leader when it comes to start-ups
  12. Nordic Council of MinistersTheresa May: “We will not be turning our backs on the Nordic region”

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us