The Spanish semi-annual presidency of the European Union Last Thursday, the political agreement on the crisis regulation was practically taken for granted, the last piece of the asylum and immigration pact that remained to be agreed upon, called to regulate crisis situations in cases of massive arrivals. At the last minute, the doubts of Italy, a key country for the agreement, prevented the existence of a qualified majority from being certified, which the Twenty-Seven have definitively confirmed this Wednesday, on the eve of a informal leaders’ summit in Granada in which immigration will also be discussed. Poland and Hungary have voted against, while Austria, Czech Republic and Slovakia They have abstained, according to diplomatic sources.
“We have taken a big step forward on a critical issue for the future of the EU. With today’s agreement we are in a better position to reach an agreement on the entire asylum and migration pact with the European Parliament before the end of this semester “, the acting Minister of the Interior celebrated in a statement, Fernando Grande-Marlaska, which last Thursday already confirmed the existence of an “unquestionable majority” after attracting Berlin, which at the end of last July opposed the Spanish compromise proposal for humanitarian reasons. After ironing out rough edges, the German government gave his approval last Thursday but resisted Italydue to the role of NGO in rescuing immigrants, which this Wednesday lifted its blockade.
“It’s an important piece of the puzzle. Asylum and Immigration Pact. It is important to reach the agreement to guarantee order at the EU’s external borders and reduce flows,” also added the Swedish immigration minister, Maria Malmer. “We have achieved it with pragmatism, commitment and unity,” the commissioner highlighted. responsible, Ylva Johannson, describing the political agreement as “excellent news.” As usual, Hungary and Poland, the two countries most critical of the migration policy that the EU is trying to design have voted against. He Government of Viktor Orbán has criticized Brussels for forcing a quick debate, lasting just 13 minutes, before voting and proceeding with a “dangerous proposal.”
“Brussels has avoided the required consensus decision-making process even though this regulation will not stop migration but instead imposes immigration on member states. It has become clear that Brussels seeks unchecked power to decide when, where and how many immigrants distribute if there is a sudden increase in a member state. The Hungarian government continues to systematically reject mandatory quotas and migrant ghettos,” Hungarian government spokesman Zoltan Kovacs said in a message on a social network.
Negotiation with the European Parliament
The qualified majority in favor of the agreement reached this Wednesday by the ambassadors will prevent the informal summit this Friday in Granada from being marred by this controversial issue and at the same time launch the interinstitutional negotiations with the European Parliament with a view to closing the agreement before the end of the year. Precisely as a pressure measure to force governments to step on the accelerator, the European Parliament decided to paralyze the negotiations on two other regulations a couple of weeks ago.
The crisis regulation will allow Member States affected by crisis or force majeure situations apply the forms with greater flexibility – and less protective for asylum seekers – in case of mass arrivals. For example, countries affected by mass arrivals will be able to extend the detention of immigrants at the external borders for up to 40 weeks, speed up procedures and simplify them if they come from countries with recognition rates – that is, when the asylum application is accepted. – less than 75% to accelerate the repatriation of those who do not have the right to stay.
European solidarity
Related news
They will also be able to request “solidarity” from other Member States when they experience “exceptional” mass arrivals. As in the agreement closed in July there will be no mandatory fees of relocation, as the frontline countries would have preferred but a red line for Poland or Hungary, although there is a battery of options that other European partners can choose from to alleviate the burden that the countries through which immigrants enter may suffer. Options include the relocation of asylum seekers or beneficiaries of voluntary international protection from the Member State in crisis to Member States that agree to receive them, financial compensation for those who prefer to pay rather than host, and other alternative measures such as assistance in the return of irregular immigrants.
According to the agreement, “these exceptional measures and this solidarity support” will require the authorization of the Council in accordance with the principles of necessity and proportionality and in full respect of the fundamental rights of third-country nationals and stateless persons. The European Commission will be in charge of designing and developing support plans and possible exceptions when a Member State activates the crisis situation.