Skip to main content

How the EU has reduced migration

Within the Shengen Zone the control of migration is an EU responsibility.  Control is implemented by about 100,000 national border guards and an ever increasing number of EU "Frontex" forces. Until the EU passes its tough New Pact on migration the methods used to control migration are depending upon how much the EU turns a "blind eye" to national policies.  The migration crisis in the Mediterranean has led to a steady switch from firmly enforcing the Return Directive, which permits most asylum seekers to stay for relatively long periods, to tacitly approving tough measures.

However, the Return Directive, Article 2.2, exempts EU states from applying any formal legal framework at their borders:

"2.   Member States may decide not to apply this Directive to third-country nationals who:

(a) are subject to a refusal of entry in accordance with Article 13 of the Schengen Borders Code, or who are apprehended or intercepted by the competent authorities in connection with the irregular crossing by land, sea or air of the external border of a Member State and who have not subsequently obtained an authorisation or a right to stay in that Member State;

(b) are subject to return as a criminal law sanction or as a consequence of a criminal law sanction, according to national law, or who are the subject of extradition procedures."

This anomaly was spotted by the EU Parliamentary review of the Return Directive: "Most Member States rely on Article 2(2)(a) of  the Return Directive and do not apply  the Directive in 'border cases'. The procedure applicable in such contexts affords fewer guarantees to the person concerned and typically involves the deprivation of liberty.  This finding underscores the point in the external policy dimension that EU readmission agreements (EURAs) by themselves are not an issue, but rather the fact that they operate in increasingly informal contexts (or are indeed replaced by informal agreements). "

If EU countries can immediately turn round illegal migrants the EU can effectively wash its hands of the matter and avoid the worthy legality of the Return Directive.  This means that so long as migrants are caught at the border they can be unceremoniously deported.  As an example Italy has sent 40,000 migrants straight back to Libya over 3 years.  This has had a remarkable deterrent effect on Mediterranean crossings and has saved thousands of lives.

However, even in the case of bona fide asylum seekers and migrants who are subject to the Return Directive, having escaped Article 2, the EU law allows the system to be "gamed".

Much of the enhanced deportation of asylum seekers has resulted from ignoring the "non-refoulement" principle of International Human Rights in which a person should not be deported if their rights are at risk.

In Italy, the share of refused asylum seekers increased considerably between 2012 and 2015, from around 18 to 53%. In most other countries asylum seekers are treated strictly according to the law and most are allowed to represent their case (except Poland with 25% return). The strict implementation of the law is not actually required by the Return Directive which only implies that Human Rights of migrants should be respected.  In Italy and Poland deportation is implemented at the first level of the appeal process (ie: no further appeals).

However, even those treated strictly according to the law are often caught out by time limitations for appeals which vary between 2 days and 30 days and are modified depending on the circumstances, such as detention.

Detention as a deterrent is being used aggressively, especially in Greece.  There were over 80,000 migrants being held in detention in the EU in 2018.

People might attempt to exonerate the EU by arguing that agreements with source countries such as Libya mean that just sending migrants back is acceptable but as Amnesty points out, this means being totally deaf to applications for asylum.  What is remarkable about the EU management of migration is that it would be utterly unacceptable to UK journalists if it were implemented in the UK.  "Just turn them round at the border and send them back" would be considered a slogan of the far right.  The EU gets a free pass from UK journalists.

Many of our "liberal" journalists are also blind to way that stern measures have saved thousands of lives in the Mediterranean.  Weak measures encouraged risky crossings of the sea and we are witnessing the same encouragement to cross the Channel by journalists who either don't realize that the road to hell is paved with what they consider to be good intentions or have evil motives.

3/7/2021

See EU Parliament: Evaluation of the implementation of the Return Directive

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Practical Idealism by Richard Nicolaus Coudenhove-Kalergi

Coudenhove-Kalergi was a pioneer of European integration. He was the founder and President for 49 years of the Paneuropean Union. His parents were Heinrich von Coudenhove-Kalergi, an Austro-Hungarian diplomat, and Mitsuko Aoyama, the daughter of an oil merchant, antiques-dealer, and huge landowner family in Tokyo. His "Pan-Europa" was published in 1923 and contained a membership form for the Pan-Europa movement. Coudenhove-Kalergi's movement held its first Congress in Vienna in 1926. In 1927 the French Prime Minister, Aristide Briand was elected honorary president.  Personalities attending included: Albert Einstein, Thomas Mann and Sigmund Freud. Figures who later became central to founding the EU, such as Konrad Adenauer became members . His basic idea was that democracy was a transitional stage that leads to rule by a new aristocracy that is largely taken from the Jewish "master race" (Kalergi's terminology). His movement was reviled by Hitler and H
1 comment
Read more

The Falklands have always been Argentine - Las Malvinas son Argentinas

"The Falklands have always been Argentine" is taught to every Argentine child as a matter of faith.  What was Argentina during the time when it "always" possessed Las Malvinas?  In this article I will trace the history of Argentina in the context of its physical and political relationship with "Las Malvinas", the Falkland Islands.  The Argentine claim to the Falkland Islands dates from a brief episode in 1831-32 so it is like Canada claiming the USA despite two centuries of separate development. This might sound like ancient history but Argentina has gone to war for this ancient claim so the following article is well worth reading. For a summary of the legal case see: Las Malvinas: The Legal Case Argentina traces its origins to Spanish South America when it was part of the Viceroyalty of the Rio del Plata.  The Falklands lay off the Viceroyalty of Peru, controlled by the Captain General of Chile.  In 1810 the Falklands were far from the geographical b
35 comments
Read more

Membership of the EU: pros and cons

5th December 2013, update May 2016 Nigel Lawson, ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer,  recently criticised the UK membership of the EU , the media has covered his mainstream view as if he is a bad boy starting a fight in the school playground, but is he right about the EU? What has changed that makes EU membership a burning issue?  What has changed is that the 19 countries of the Eurozone are now seeking political union to escape their financial problems.   Seven further EU countries have signed up to join the Euro but the British and Danish have opted out.  The EU is rapidly becoming two blocks - the 26 and Britain and Denmark.   Lawson's fear was that if Britain stays in the EU it will be isolated and dominated by a Eurozone bloc that uses "unified representation of the euro area" , so acting like a single country which controls 90% of the vote in the EU with no vetoes available to the UK in most decisions.  The full plans for Eurozone political union ( EMU Stage
15 comments
Read more