By introducing an asylum system with two statuses, the government hopes to compete rigorously with neighboring countries. Germany and Belgium do make a distinction between A and B refugees.
The reform of the asylum system is seen in the cabinet as the most important life buoy to reduce the influx of asylum seekers in the not too distant future. The ministers involved will discuss this at the Catshuis on Tuesday.
Most of the measures that are being considered take years before they take effect, also because they have to be regulated at a European level. VVD and CDA are in favor of introducing a two-status system. D66 is not blocking the idea for the time being, but wants to test the plan against legislation, international treaties and feasibility.
Acceptance rates
The government looks with interest and discomfort at Belgium and Germany, where the approval percentages are considerably lower. In the Netherlands, 85 percent of asylum seekers are currently told that they can stay, in Belgium that percentage is 43 percent and in Germany 62 percent of asylum seekers are allowed to stay. In the EU, the percentage for all nationalities is an average of 48 percent.
“We are extra attractive because we grant more rights to migrants who should only stay for a short time,” says a minister.
The idea is to grant A status to refugees who are persecuted personally or as members of a group, for example on the basis of ethnic background or political opinion. They should stay permanently.
Text continues below the photo
The b status should apply to asylum seekers who are not directly prosecuted, but who are in danger when they return to their country of origin, for example because they are fleeing a civil war. Asylum seekers with a B status would then have fewer rights. For example, apart from no permanent residence, they would not be entitled to family reunification.
Aliens Act
The Netherlands had an asylum system with two statuses until the new Aliens Act of 2000. Since then, aliens have all been given the same status. European legislation allows member states to distinguish between direct and secondary protection.
That does not mean that the measure is so easy, says Professor of Migration Law Lieneke Slingenberg of VU University Amsterdam.
The Netherlands will first have to amend the law. Moreover: “The two-status system has not been abolished for nothing. It led to lawsuits from asylum seekers who wanted a different status. Because if you come from a war zone, you may still be personally persecuted. All those extra legal procedures lead to more work for the IND, which is already barely able to cope.”
Moreover, the distinction between A and B refugees raises ‘follow-up questions’, says Slingenberg. “Union law may allow countries to make a distinction, but if that leads to certain asylum seekers receiving fewer rights – and that must be the intention – then this could again be in conflict with human rights treaties.”