🗊Презентация EASO, AMIF, the years 2015-2016, outlook

EASO, AMIF, THE YEARs 2015-2016, OUTLOOK Presented by Boldizsár Nagy, The Urals State Law University, 2016 Yekaterinburg

EUROPEAN ASYLUM SUPPORT OFFICE (EASO) REGULATION (EU) No 439/2010 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 19 May 2010 establishing a European Asylum Support Office OJ L 132/11, 29.5.2010

EASO Purposes Coordinate and strengthen practical cooperation among Member States and improve the implementation of the CEAS; Operative support to MS subject to particular pressure on their asylum and reception systems Scientific and technical assistance in regard to the policy and legislation of the Union

EASO Priorities Start of operation: 19 June 2011. For developments check: http://easo.europa.eu/ Last annual report: Annual Report on the Situation of Asylum in the European Union 2014 published in July 205 Newsletter: https://easo.europa.eu/wp-content/uploads/EASO-Newsletter-March-2016.pdf COI: https://easo.europa.eu/asylum-documentation/easo-publication-and-documentation/

Asylum Support teams ASTs are multidisciplinary teams of EU experts deployed by EASO in a Member State for a limited time in order to support the asylum system of that Member State. Experts are made available by MS-s. They appear in EASO ‘asylum intervention pool’. Deployment is upon request and based on agreement between the State and EASO. ASTs may provide expertise in relation to, among other matters, reception, training, information on countries of origin and knowledge of the handling and management of asylum cases, including those of vulnerable groups. Costs are born by EASO _________________________________________________________ Deployments, so far: Greece, 2011-; Italy, 2013-, Luxembourg, 2012, Bulgaria, 2013-2015; Cyprus 2014 – 2015.

THE ASYLUM AND MIGRATION AND INTEGRATION FUND

The Asylum Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) Replaces European Refugee Fund, the European Fund for the Integration of third-country nationals and the European Return Fund 2014-2020 (seven years) Total: 3 137 million Euros (in current prices) Member states may use 2 752 million Euros of which 360 million to cover specific actions (e..g. joint processing centres, joint returns) + Union Resettlement Programme from third tries + transfer of beneficiaries of international protection from one Member State to another.

The Asylum Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) Of the remaining 2 392 million Nationally 20 % must go to measures to support legal migration and promote the effective integration of migrants and 20 % to asylum measures For resettlement MSs will receive a lump sum of 6,000 euros for each resettled person, which can be increased up to €10,000 for vulnerable persons or persons coming from priority areas. 385 million set aside for Union actions, emergency assistance, the European Migration Network and technical assistance of the Commission

The Asylum Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) Activities to be funded Asylum systems – reception (non-exhaustive list) E.G. The provision of material aid, support services, health and psychological care; translation and interpretation, the provision of legal assistance and representation; alternative measures to detention; accommodation infrastructure and services; Member States’ capacity to develop, monitor and evaluate their asylum policies and procedures Collect, analyse and disseminate qualitative and quantitative data among others for the early warning mechanism in the Dublin regulation Resettlement and relocation E.g. establishment and development of national resettlement and relocation programmes;

The Asylum Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) Allocation Minimum amount (5 or 10 million) + % average of 2011-2013 allocations European Refugee Fund +Integration Fund +Return Fund Examples: France: 265 565 577 Germany: 208 416 877 Greece: 259 348 877 Hungary: 23 713 477 Union agencies (EASO, Frontex) will also receive financial support from the fund

THE EXCEPTIONAL YEARS 2015 - 2016 FAILURE OF THE SYSTEM, EFFORTS TO RESCUE SOLIDARITY WITHIN THE EU AND WITH OTHER AFFECTED STATES

Symptoms of malfunctioning of the CEAS Thousands of deaths at sea and inland The overall impression of a „crisis”, which is seen as a European crisis The increasing tension between Member States (e.g. Sweden-Denmark, Austria – Greece, Hungary – Austria, Slovenia, Croatia, etc.) The uneasy relationship with Turkey The grossly unfair participation in the provision of protection to refugees reaching EU territory The repeated, but largely fruitless sweeping legislative and political efforts, including negotiations with transit countries (Western Balkan conference) and states of the regions of origin (Valetta summit), decisions to resettle and relocate refugees and asylum seekers The breakdown of the Dublin system Fences at the external and internal borders & reintroduction of border controls at Schengen internal borders

The Causes of failure - design Dublin: after family and visa/residence permit the external border crossed perimeter states exposed to large numbers of application Greece defaults in 2011, Hungary and others in 2015 Minimal tools of solidarity before 2015 AMIF - monetary EASO – sending expert teams Temporary protection: voluntary offers to take over (never used) The Dublin regime on determining the state whose duty is to conduct RSD: manifestly unjust, NOT burden sharing but shifting

The Causes of failure - Overload Overload number of (first) applications, EU 27 or 28 + Iceland. Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland: But: highly uneven distribution UK 39,000, Poland 12,190 Spain: 14,785 applications Germany 476,620*, Sweden 162,550, Austria 88,180 (All data from Eurostat as reported on 13 March 2016) Major groups with unlikely claims (Serbia, Kosovo, BiH, etc.) * Only the formal applications are included. Primary registration includes a further 600000 persons (altogether: 1.091.894 ) http://www.n-tv.de/politik/Fast-1-1-Millionen-Fluechtlinge-registriert-article16687996.html (20160313)

The uneven distribution of asylum applications and the impact of the Hungarian restrictive measures

Raw statistics – countries of origin, 2015

Raw statistics – asylum countries in the eu, 2015

The Causes of failure Free rider member states Greece, Italy, Hungary, Croatia, Slovenia, Austria Ought to: register claim, submit fingerprint to Eurodac + start RSD procedure + keep within territory Instead: allowing to leave or actively transporting to next MS

WHAT SOLIDARITY IS CONCEIVABLE AMONG EU MEMBER STATES GOING BEYOND AMIF? = RELOCATION, HOTSPOTS

Relocation decisions Relocation: distributing among Member States those asylum seekers who are already within the EU and have a good chance of being recognised – i.e. members of groups with 75% recognition rate in the previous quarter (Syrians, Iraqis and Eritreans) 2 decisions: COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2015/1523 of 14 September 2015 40 000 persons 24,000 from Italy, 16,000 from Greece COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2015/1601 of 22 September 2015 120 000 persons First year: 15,600 from Italy and 50,400 from Greece Second year: 54,000 either form the same two or from other Member States. No relocation to Denmark, Ireland, UK, Greece and Italy – 23 MS take up the 40 plus 120 thousand Relocating MS get 6000 Euros/head In exchange: Greece, Italy must develop „roadmap”

Member States’ support to Emergency relocation mechanism 28 January 2016 compared to 15 March 2016

Relocation as of April 21

Relocation as of April 21

Hotspots Hotspots = in Italy and Greece: complex sites where experts from different EU MS work together in receiving and screening the applications and organising the return of those not in need of international protection. 6 in Italy, 5 in Greece.

The state of play with the hotspots End of January, 2016 GREECE ITALY

WHAT SOLIDARITY WITH THOSE STATE WHO HOST MOST REFUGEES? RESETTLEMENT, EU TRUST FUND FOR SYRIA /”MADAD TRUST FUND”/, EMERGENCY TRUST FUND FOR AFRICA

Solidarity with those hosting refugees and support for other affected states Resettlement of 22 thousand refugees from outside of the EU in the next two years finally decided on 1 October 2015. Trust Fund to support Syrian refugee hosting countries (500 million Euros from the budget of the EU in 2015, to be matched by another 500 million donated directly by the MS) (See also the later Turkey – EU deal) Emergency Trust Fund for stability and addressing the root causes of irregular migration and displaced persons in Africa. „The Commission considers that national contributions should match the €1.8 billion EU funding.” COM(2015) 510 final COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL AND THE COUNCIL Managing the refugee crisis: State of Play of the Implementation of the Priority Actions under the European Agenda on Migration, p. 10.)

Solidarity with those hosting refugees and support for other affected states

The deal with Turkey, 29 November 2015 EU’s contribution More frequents and regular summits High level dialogue on economic and on energy cooperation, prospect for a customs union Accession negotiations revived, concrete talks to resume in December 2015 Visa liberalisation accelerated A Refugee Facility for Turkey was established. „The EU is committed to provide an initial 3 billion euro of additional resources.” as „burden sharing within the framework of Turkey-EU cooperation”.

The deal with Turkey, 29 November 2015 Turkey’s contribution Activate Joint action plan of 15 October 2016: „stemming the influx of irregular migrants” (including into Turkey!) „both sides will, as agreed and with immediate effect, step up their active cooperation on migrants who are not in need of international protection, preventing travel to Turkey and the EU” „ensuring the application of the established bilateral readmission provisions and swiftly returning migrants who are not in need of international protection to their countries of origin [not to Turkey!]” „decisive and swift action to enhance the fight against criminal smuggling networks” Turkey intends to adopt measures to further improve the socio-economic situation of the Syrians under temporary protection.

The European Council meeting (with Turkey), 7 march 2016 The Council’s own summary (http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/03/07-eu-turkey-meeting-statement/ ) Return all new irregular migrants crossing from Turkey into the Greek islands with the costs covered by the EU; Resettle, for every Syrian readmitted by Turkey from Greek islands, another Syrian from Turkey to the EU Member States, within the framework of the existing commitments;  Accelerate the implementation of the visa liberalization roadmap with all Member States with a view to lifting the visa requirements for Turkish citizens at the latest by the end of June 2016; Speed up the disbursement of the initially allocated 3 billion euros to ensure funding of a first set of projects before the end of March and decide on additional funding for the Refugee Facility for Syrians; Prepare for the decision on the opening of new chapters in the accession negotiations as soon as possible, building on the October 2015 European Council conclusions; Work with Turkey in any joint endeavour to improve humanitarian conditions inside Syria which would allow for the local population and refugees to live in areas which will be more safe

What, actually?! Statement text: „Turkey confirmed its commitment in implementing the bilateral Greek-Turkish readmission agreement to accept the rapid return of all migrants not in need of international protection crossing from Turkey into Greece and to take back all irregular migrants apprehended on Turkish waters.” … „Following their meeting with Prime Minister Davutoğlu, … [the heads of state and government] warmly welcomed the additional proposals made today by Turkey to address the migration issue. They agreed to work on the basis of the principles they contain: to return all new irregular migrants crossing from Turkey into the Greek islands with the costs covered by the EU;” All, or all not in need of international protection?!

The EU-Turkey „statement” – the deal of 18 March 2016 „[A]ny application for asylum will be processed individually by the Greek authorities in accordance with the Asylum Procedures Directive, in cooperation with UNHCR” - right to stay till first instance decision, unless inadmissible - right to appeal „All new irregular migrants crossing from Turkey into Greek islands as from 20 March 2016 will be returned to Turkey. This will take place in full accordance with EU and international law, thus excluding any kind of collective expulsion.” - Contradicts to the promise to process every claim - EU law: return directive = voluntary departure preferred, appeal against removal decision, strict conditions for detention „[T]emporary and extraordinary measure” - For how long? Does extraordineriness waive rights? „Migrants not applying for asylum or whose application has been found unfounded or inadmissible in accordance with the said directive will be returned to Turkey” - So far very few applied in Greece (11 370 out of 880 000), now they will - Inadmissibility: is Turkey a safe third country and/or a country of first asylum?!

The EU-Turkey „statement” – the deal of 18 March 2016 „For every Syrian being returned to Turkey from Greek islands, another Syrian will be resettled from Turkey to the EU taking into account the UN Vulnerability Criteria” - How can Syrians be returned if they applied for asylum (recognition rate in EU above 98% in Q4 of 2015)? - What about Dublin and the right to join family and be processed there? „[R]esettlement under this mechanism will take place, … honouring the commitments [of 20 July 2015], of which 18.000 places for resettlement remain. Any further need for resettlement will be carried out through a similar voluntary arrangement up to a limit of an additional 54.000 persons.” … The Commission's will propose an amendment to the relocation decision of 22 September 2015 to allow for any resettlement commitment undertaken to be offset from non-allocated places under the decision… Should the number of returns exceed the numbers provided for above, this mechanism will be discontinued.” - A mechanism up to 72 000 resetllements. No plan for afterwards - Purely voluntary Visa liberalisation among Schengen states for Turkey by the end of June 2016 Opening Chapter 33 in the accession negotiations

CONCLUSION

Summary Progress, slow motion or collapse? Common asylum procedure and a uniform status has not been achieved. The recasts are still minimum standards, decision making is national and divergent The CJEU has embarked on a genuine harmonisation but it is a slow and fragmented process Intra-EU solidarity is minimal, neither and agreed intra EU relocation rule exists nor does the Dublin III regulation address effectively the real problems of periphery states exposed to large pressures The EU does not have its fair share in alleviating the global (and especially the North African and Syrian) refugee situation

Summary Progress, slow motion or collapse? Attention on third countries, the externalisation of asylum policy is increasing, with a dual agenda: on the one hand enhancing rescue at sea, human rights guarantees, and exceptionally regularised access to the EU territory (resettlement), on the other hand increasing control and shifting RSD to transit countries. The very large number of arrivals in the form of a mixed flow in 2015 constitute a major challenge. Several member Sates (Greece, Hungary, Croatia, Slovenia, Austria) breach the EU law for long periods and in respect of hundreds of thousands of persons. Germany may not be expected to provide protection for all in need and return those, who do not need it It is unrealistic and morally untenable to expect the non-EU states (Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Macedonia, Serbia etc.) to contribute more in the way of „retaining” the refugees in the region. Unless an EU – wide response emerges the system (Dublin and Schengen) will collapse

THANKS! BOLDIZSÁR NAGY E-mail: nagyb@ceu.hu CEU IR and Legal Budapest, 1051 Nádor u. 9. Tel.: +36 1 242 6313, Telefax: +36 1 430 0235

THE EXCEPTIONAL YEARS 2015 - 2016 FAILURE OF THE SYSTEM, EFFORTS TO RESCUE SOLIDARITY WITHIN THE EU AND WITH OTHER AFFECTED STATES

Symptoms of malfunctioning of the CEAS Thousands of deaths at sea and inland The overall impression of a „crisis”, which is seen as a European crisis The increasing tension between Member States (e.g. Sweden-Denmark, Austria – Greece, Hungary – Austria, Slovenia, Croatia, etc.) The uneasy relationship with Turkey The grossly unfair participation in the provision of protection to refugees reaching EU territory The repeated, but largely fruitless sweeping legislative and political efforts, including negotiations with transit countries (Western Balkan conference) and states of the regions of origin (Valetta summit), decisions to resettle and relocate refugees and asylum seekers The breakdown of the Dublin system Fences at the external and internal borders & reintroduction of border controls at Schengen internal borders

The Causes of failure - design Dublin: after family and visa/residence permit the external border crossed perimeter states exposed to large numbers of application Greece defaults in 2011, Hungary and others in 2015 Minimal tools of solidarity before 2015 AMIF - monetary EASO – sending expert teams Temporary protection: voluntary offers to take over (never used) The Dublin regime on determining the state whose duty is to conduct RSD: manifestly unjust, NOT burden sharing but shifting

The Causes of failure - Overload Overload number of (first) applications, EU 27 or 28 + Iceland. Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland: Not the final figure yet, data for several countries missing But: highly uneven distribution UK 35,670 (Jan-Nov), Poland 11,040 (Jan – Nov) Spain: 10,295 (Jan-Sept) applications Germany 476,615 (Jan – Dec), Sweden 162,560 (Jan – Dec), Austria 80,895 (Jan – Nov) Major groups with unlikely claims (Serbia, Kosovo, BiH, etc.)

The uneven distribution of asylum applications and the impact of the Hungarian restrictive measures

The Causes of failure Free rider member states Greece, Italy, Hungary, Croatia, Slovenia, Austria Ought to: register claim, submit fingerprint to Eurodac + start RSD procedure + keep within territory Instead: allowing to leave or actively transporting to next MS

WHAT SOLIDARITY IS CONCEIVABLE AMONG EU MEMBER STATES GOING BEYOND AMIF? = RELOCATION, HOTSPOTS

Relocation decisions Relocation: distributing among Member States those asylum seekers who are already within the EU and have a good chance of being recognised – i.e. members of groups with 75% recognition rate in the previous quarter (Syrians, Iraqis and Eritreans) 2 decisions: COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2015/1523 of 14 September 2015 40 000 persons 24,000 from Italy, 16,000 from Greece COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2015/1601 of 22 September 2015 120 000 persons First year: 15,600 from Italy and 50,400 from Greece Second year: 54,000 either form the same two or from other Member States. No relocation to Denmark, Ireland, UK, Greece and Italy – 23 MS take up the 40 plus 120 thousand Relocating MS get 6000 Euros/head In exchange: Greece, Italy must develop „roadmap”

Member States’ support to Emergency relocation mechanism Communicated 28 January 2016

Hotspots, AMIF Hotspots = in Italy and Greece: complex sites where experts from different EU MS work together in receiving and screening the applications and organising the return of those not in need of international protection. 6 planned for Italy, 5 for Greece. AMIF: Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund 2014-2020: 2,6 billion Euros! To support the reception of asylum seekers and the integration of refugees and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection

The state of play with the hotspots End of January, 2016 GREECE Planned site, capacity: Lesvos (2709) Chios (2250) Samos (650) Leros (330) Kos (290) Actually functioning: Lesvos (184 Frontex officers, 8 EASO experts and staff) Samos (53 Frontex officers, 5 EASO experts and staff) ITALY Planned site, capacity: Lampedusa (650) Pozzallo (300) Porte Empedocle (300) Augusta (300) Taranto (300) Trapani (400) Actually functioning: Lampedusa (24Frontex officers, 2 EASO experts and staff) Pozzallo (21Frontex officers, 2 EASO experts and staff) Taranto (6 Frontex officers, 0 EASO experts and staff) Trappani (14 Frontex officers, 2 EASO experts and staff)

WHAT SOLIDARITY WITH THOSE STATE WHO HOST MOST REFUGEES? RESETTLEMENT, EU TRUST FUND FOR SYRIA /”MADAD TRUST FUND”/, EMERGENCY TRUST FUND FOR AFRICA

Solidarity with those hosting refugees and support for other affected states Resettlement of 22 thousand refugees from outside of the EU in the next two years finally decided on 1 October 2015. Trust Fund to support Syrian refugee hosting countries (500 million Euros from the budget of the EU in 2015, to be matched by another 500 million donated directly by the MS) (See also the later Turkey – EU deal) Emergency Trust Fund for stability and addressing the root causes of irregular migration and displaced persons in Africa. „The Commission considers that national contributions should match the €1.8 billion EU funding.” COM(2015) 510 final COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL AND THE COUNCIL Managing the refugee crisis: State of Play of the Implementation of the Priority Actions under the European Agenda on Migration, p. 10.)

Solidarity with those hosting refugees and support for other affected states

The deal with Turkey, 29 November 2015 EU’s contribution More frequents and regular summits High level dialogue on economic and on energy cooperation, prospect for a customs union Accession negotiations revived, concrete talks to resume in December 2015 Visa liberalisation accelerated A Refugee Facility for Turkey was established. „The EU is committed to provide an initial 3 billion euro of additional resources.” as „burden sharing within the framework of Turkey-EU cooperation”.

The deal with Turkey, 29 November 2015 Turkey’s contribution Activate Joint action plan of 15 October 2016: „stemming the influx of irregular migrants” (including into Turkey!) „both sides will, as agreed and with immediate effect, step up their active cooperation on migrants who are not in need of international protection, preventing travel to Turkey and the EU” „ensuring the application of the established bilateral readmission provisions and swiftly returning migrants who are not in need of international protection to their countries of origin [not to Turkey!]” „decisive and swift action to enhance the fight against criminal smuggling networks” Turkey intends to adopt measures to further improve the socio-economic situation of the Syrians under temporary protection.

The European Council meeting (with Turkey), 7 march 2016 The Council’s own summary (http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/03/07-eu-turkey-meeting-statement/ ) Return all new irregular migrants crossing from Turkey into the Greek islands with the costs covered by the EU; Resettle, for every Syrian readmitted by Turkey from Greek islands, another Syrian from Turkey to the EU Member States, within the framework of the existing commitments;  Accelerate the implementation of the visa liberalization roadmap with all Member States with a view to lifting the visa requirements for Turkish citizens at the latest by the end of June 2016; Speed up the disbursement of the initially allocated 3 billion euros to ensure funding of a first set of projects before the end of March and decide on additional funding for the Refugee Facility for Syrians; Prepare for the decision on the opening of new chapters in the accession negotiations as soon as possible, building on the October 2015 European Council conclusions; Work with Turkey in any joint endeavour to improve humanitarian conditions inside Syria which would allow for the local population and refugees to live in areas which will be more safe

What, actually?! Statement text: „Turkey confirmed its commitment in implementing the bilateral Greek-Turkish readmission agreement to accept the rapid return of all migrants not in need of international protection crossing from Turkey into Greece and to take back all irregular migrants apprehended on Turkish waters.” … „Following their meeting with Prime Minister Davutoğlu, … [the heads of state and government] warmly welcomed the additional proposals made today by Turkey to address the migration issue. They agreed to work on the basis of the principles they contain: to return all new irregular migrants crossing from Turkey into the Greek islands with the costs covered by the EU;” All, or all not in need of international protection?!

CONCLUSION

Summary Progress, slow motion or collapse? Common asylum procedure and a uniform status has not been achieved. The recasts are still minimum standards, decision making is national and divergent The CJEU has embarked on a genuine harmonisation but it is a slow and fragmented process Intra-EU solidarity is minimal, neither and agreed intra EU relocation rule exists nor does the Dublin III regulation address effectively the real problems of periphery states exposed to large pressures The EU does not have its fair share in alleviating the global (and especially the North African and Syrian) refugee situation

Summary Progress, slow motion or collapse? Attention on third countries, the externalisation of asylum policy is increasing, with a dual agenda: on the one hand enhancing rescue at sea, human rights guarantees, and exceptionally regularised access to the EU territory (resettlement), on the other hand increasing control and shifting RSD to transit countries. The very large number of arrivals in the form of a mixed flow in 2015 constitute a major challenge. Several member Sates (Greece, Hungary, Croatia, Slovenia, Austria) breach the EU law for long periods and in respect of hundreds of thousands of persons. Germany may not be expected to provide protection for all in need and return those, who do not need it It is unrealistic and morally untenable to expect the non-EU states (Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Macedonia, Serbia etc.) to contribute more in the way of „retaining” the refugees in the region. Unless an EU – wide response emerges the system (Dublin and Schengen) will collapse

THANKS! BOLDIZSÁR NAGY E-mail: nagyb@ceu.hu CEU IR and Legal Budapest, 1051 Nádor u. 9. Tel.: +36 1 242 6313, Telefax: +36 1 430 0235