The Euroepan Union’s priorities for the area of migration and asylum

The year 2009 was marked by a context of international by Community rather than State funds, which will make its economic crisis, which has affected migratory flows into the EU financing easier.2 along with the member states’ perception of the phenomena. However, contradicting European-level policy in irregular The debates arising from these two areas, led by the Czech immigration, both Belgium and were carrying out amnesty and Swedish Presidencies of the EU, revolve around the issue campaigns for illegal immigrants throughout 2009. In the case of how to combat irregular immigration, the contents of the of Belgium, immigrants had to demonstrate that they were new Stockholm Programme, the Lisbon Treaty and managing integrated into the community, for which they had to justify flows of refugees and petitioners for asylum. residence in the country for at least five years or having worked With a situation of rising unemployment figures in the EU member in it for at least two and a half years. In response to criticism states and increased demand on the social services, reducing of the amnesty, the government denied having carried out any irregular immigration was one of the priorities in 2009. Hence, “mass regularisation”. 3 In Italy, the amnesty was aimed at those June saw the approval of a Directive of the European Parliament immigrants employed in domestic service or caring for the aged and the Council of Europe prohibiting the contracting of illegally from at least 1 August 2009.4 It is therefore clear that there staying third-country nationals, which is to come into force on is persisting inconsistency among the member states in their 20 July 2011.1 This instrument establishes certain obligations management of illegal immigration. Again, in this context, the for entrepreneurs, for example requiring of third-country EU is still facing the rejection of the Latin American countries nationals that they present their work or residence permit, and of its migrant return programmes and their requests for bigger that employers should keep a copy of such documents in case regularisation campaigns.5 Accordingly, even if legislation has of inspection by the appropriate national authorities. Moreover, been approved in this regard, one cannot yet speak of any infringement of the Directive can be penalised by fines or other coherent policy of irregular immigrant management in the EU. sanctions, for example exclusion from entitlement to public However, one area in which it is proving easier to reach benefits or even closure of the establishment concerned. The consensus is that of issuing work permits to highly-qualified Directive also stipulates that mechanisms must be established immigrants. The Directive that regulates the issuance of the in order to permit third-country nationals to lodge complaints or now-famous blue card to highly-qualified third-country workers claims against their employers. was approved in May and member countries are expected Another notable aspect of the Directive is that it establishes to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative certain actions as criminal offences, including, in this regard, provisions necessary for them to implement the Directive the contracting of a significant number of third-country nationals by 19 June 2011.6 In order to be eligible, the third-country in an irregular situation, contracting of persons who are victims national must have a contract of a minimum of one year’s of human trafficking, contracting of minors, and abusive working duration, offering a salary that is at least 1.5 times the average conditions. It includes the stipulation that member states must gross salary in the member state concerned. Nevertheless, carry out regular inspections with the aim of identifying those the Directive permits each member state to determine the immigrants who are working without the requisite permit, number of high-qualified workers that may reside in its territory. especially in sectors where contracting illegally staying third- Again, the EU member states have not yet come to agreement country nationals is common. Finally, the Directive also recognises over standard issuance of work or residence permits for third- that the struggle against the contracting of illegal immigrants country nationals who are not highly qualified. This is due to cannot be implemented at State level alone and therefore needs the fact that, as one subtitle of the Stockholm Programme to be carried out at the European Community level. indicates, 7 the prime aim of the EU in this domain is to satisfy In 2009, another change relevant for controlling irregular the needs of the national labour markets. Hence it is difficult to immigration was the European Council’s conversion of the define at the Community level the circumstances under which European Police Office (EUROPOL) into an EU organism with a permit should be issued to a third-country national. the aim of facilitating cooperation between the police forces On the other hand, 2009 came to an end with the approval of the different member states. Changing the legal framework of the Stockholm Programme, which replaces the Hague of EUROPOL was expedited so that it is now more adaptable Programme. The Stockholm Programme points to relevant to present trends in delinquency, which will help to combat policies in the spheres of freedom, security and justice and will organised delinquency on the international scale. Moreover, therefore provide the guidelines for cooperation between EU since it is an EU agency, EUROPOL expenses will be covered countries in legal, police and migration matters over the next 145 five years. The central aim of the Programme is to safeguard now has the power of veto when it comes to approving the interests and needs of citizens and to take on the challenge migration law. The Treaty has also eliminated the need to of guaranteeing respect for basic freedoms while also assuring reach consensus among all the member states in order to Europe the security of Europe. In order to accomplish these goals, the approve legislation so that it is now easier to pass new laws. Programme establishes six political priorities, among which In addition, the Treaty of Lisbon establishes the legal basis for are responsibility, solidarity and collaboration in the spheres of putting into effect European-level integration policies through migration and asylum.8 This means that, notwithstanding the which efforts towards integration on the national level can find present context of economic crisis, the Stockholm Programme support. Again, two Commissioners will now be responsible has established migration as a priority area, suggesting a for monitoring EU activities with regard to the spheres of number of initiatives with regard to migration and development, justice, freedom and security: the Commissioner for Justice, labour migration, rights of third-country nationals, integration Fundamental Rights and Citizenship, and the Commissioner for of immigrants, border management and questions of asylum. Internal Affairs. Regardless of these changes, the decision on The Stockholm Programme differs from its predecessors the number of third-country nationals entering the territory of a – the Tampere Programme and the Hague Programme – in member state remains the prerogative of each country. several ways. First, the Stockholm Programme establishes The implementation of the Stockholm Programme, evaluation the Global Approach to Migration as a priority, while this of the European Pact on Immigration and Asylum, and the was not the case with the earlier Programmes. This focus development of the global approach to European Migration Policy is concerned with establishing mobility partnerships with the will be some of the main challenges to be met in 2010. The path countries of Africa and Eastern Europe and, accordingly, the to be followed will depend, on the one hand, on the priorities of present Programme promotes the launching of migration the Spanish Presidency – among which are application of the profile processes for third countries with the aim of fostering Treaty of Lisbon, reinforcing the role of the EU as an international cooperation between the EU and third countries in the design actor, and managing immigration in its different dimensions, from of coherent immigration policies. Furthermore, the problem integration and cooperation with countries of origin and transit of unaccompanied minors is introduced as a specific priority, through to combating the mafia engaged in human trafficking9 another issue that was absent in the earlier Programmes. – and, on the other, the priorities of the Belgian Presidency in Likewise, the present Programme leaves aside the approach the second half of 2010, which also include the Treaty of Lisbon of harmonisation of immigration and asylum policies in the and the Stockholm Programme, especially in the domains of EU member countries, which was present in the former freedom, asylum and immigration.10 Programmes, to focus on practical solutions. In this regard, the Programme is concerned with international relations and ASYLUM POLICY the needs of European labour markets, which means that migration policies can no longer be circumscribed to the The Stockholm Programme is much more ambiguous than its spheres of freedom, security and justice alone but must also predecessors on the question of European asylum policy. Thus, embrace other relevant domains, such as foreign policy, trade, it merely invites the Council and the Parliament to establish education and social affairs. Finally, the Stockholm Programme procedures of asylum at Community level for 2012. Nevertheless, reaffirms safe return as the essential policy to be applied in the Programme does reiterate the goal of establishing within the the case of immigrants in an irregular situation, arguing that EU “a common area of protection and solidarity” in matters of voluntary return should be encouraged, along with the signing asylum and supports the development of new instruments to of treaties with the countries of origin and transit. However, achieve this goal. Hence a proposal was drawn up in 2009 for for all the positive and innovative aspects of the Stockholm the creation of a European Asylum Support Office,11 the aim of Programme, it mentions only a few time frames so that some which will be to underpin cooperation among the EU states on of the more thorny debates – which are necessary if tangible asylum issues. Also suggested is the setting up of a system for results are to come out of it – are yet to be tackled. joint treatment of requests for asylum. Such initiatives would help As for the relationship between migration and development, to reduce disparities between the levels of protection afforded the Global Forum on Migration and Development held in 2009 to nationals of any one country in the different EU member helped to consolidate the focus on this question within the EU, states. However, the Programme does not go into the details of which has opted for three priorities in this regard: facilitating how mutual recognition might be achieved among the member the sending of remittances, working with diasporas and states regarding decisions on questions of asylum. promoting circular migration, the latter of which is turning Another problem to be confronted in European asylum out to be particularly difficult at the Community level since it is policy is the considerable number of requests for asylum and more feasible by means of bilateral treaties. refugees entering the southern states of Europe. The pressure In 2009 the Treaty of Lisbon came into force, this modifying group Quadro, consisting of Italy, , and – the extant EU and EC treaties and changing the structure of which has expressed an interest in joining – has asked EU institutions. With respect to immigration, the main change for support from the other EU member states in managing is that legislation pertaining to migration is no longer to be the flows of irregular immigrants and petitioners of asylum determined by ordinary legal procedure but by co-decision in coming into their territory. The main demand of this group is which the European Parliament shares legislative power on an reform of the Dublin II system, which indicates that the state CIDOB International Yearbook 2010 Yearbook CIDOB International equal basis with the Council, which is to say that the Parliament through which the asylum seeker first enters the EU is to

146 be responsible for processing the request for asylum, which I. NET MIGRATION RATE IN THE EU makes the situation of these states even more difficult.12 MEMBER STATES 2009 % While the long-term objective of the EU is to resolve the problems -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 of illegal border crossing and to improve the management Luxembourg of requests for asylum, present-day efforts are focused on Slovenia fast solutions and provisional measures. For example, a pilot project has been initiated in Malta whereby the EU member Sweden states can offer to accept in their own territory asylum seekers Italy and refugees that have arrived in Malta.13 Nonetheless, the Belgium Stockholm Programme states that the decision to help the Denmark Quadro Group countries must be taken by each state, which is to say, such collaboration is entirely voluntary. Malta Czech Republic Notes Greece 1. Directive 2009/52/EC providing for minimum standards on sanctions and measures against employers of illegally staying third- United Kingdom country nationals. Finland

Netherlands Net migration 2. Decision of the Council of 6 April 2009 for the creation of the is the difference Austria European Police Office (EUROPOL). between the num- Spain ber of immigrants and the number 3. “Belgium to Legalise 25,000 Illegal Immigrants”, Euroactiv, 20 July Hungary of emigrants. . 2009. Portugal

4. “Italia realizará una regularización selectiva para los inmigrantes France ilegales” (Italy to Carry out Selective Regularisation of Illegal Immigrants), Cyprus Ciudadanía Informada, 23 July 2009. Slovakia

Estonia 5. “Latinoamérica pide a la UE que impulse procesos de regularización de inmigrantes” (Latin America Asks the EU to Promote Regularisation Romania Processes for Immigrants), El País, 26 September 2009. Bulgaria

Poland 6. Council Directive 2009/50/EC of 25 May 2009 on the conditions of The Euroepan Union’s priorities for the area of migration and asylum and migration area of the priorities for Union’s Euroepan The entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of highly Germany qualified employment. Latvia

Lithuania 7. “A concerted policy in keeping with national labour market Ireland requirements”. Source: Eurostat Produced by: CIDOB 8. “The Stockholm Programme: An Open and Secure Europe Serving and Protecting Citizens”, Council of Europe 5731/10. 9. Presidencia Española EU, http://www.eu2010.es/es/presidencia/ II. Asylum applications in the EU programapol/ [in English, http://www.eu2010.es/en/presidencia/ by main countries of origiN 2009 programapol/index.html] Country Total asylum applications %

10. Key Priority Areas of the EU Belgian Presidency”, European Afghanistan 17,438 15.3 Foundation Centre, 23 February 2010. Somalia 17,307 15.2 Russian Federation 17,124 15.0

11. COM (2009) 66 final 18 February 2009, “Proposal for a Regulation Iraq 16,416 14.4 1 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Serbia 16,293 14.3 Asylum Support Office”. Pakistan 7,725 6.8 Iran 6,584 5.8

12. “Quadro Group Report Stresses Solidarity and Burden Sharing”, Sri Lanka 5,944 5.2 Times of Malta, 13 January 2009. China 4,790 4.2 Eritrea 4,233 3.7

13. “The ’s Stockholm Program: Less Ambition on TOTAL EU-27 113,854 100.0

Immigration and Asylum, but More Detailed Plans”, Migration Information 1. Kosovar citizens included Source, 12 January 2010. Source: UNHCR Produced by: CIDOB

147 148 CIDOB International Yearbook 2010 Europe

III. ASYLUM APPLICANTS IN THE EU 2009

Total Total of asylum Citizenships of the main groups of asylum applicants Total positive decisions applications decisions2 over submitted Firts group Second group Third group % applications1 Country Country Applications % Country Applications % Country Applications % Austria 15,785 Russian Federation 3,565 23 Afghanistan 2,215 14 Kosovo 1,305 8 14,815 21.7 Belgium 21,645 Russian Federation 2,875 13 Kosovo 2,515 12 Afghanistan 2,055 9 14,365 20.3 Bulgaria 855 Iraq 305 36 Stateless 125 15 Afghanistan 60 7 645 41.9 Cyprus 2,665 India 300 11 Sri Lanka 235 9 Occ. Palestinian territories 230 9 3,855 29.3 Czech Republic 1,240 Ucraine 200 16 Kazakhstan 185 15 Mongolia 160 13 530 18.9 Denmark 3,725 Afghanistan 1,045 28 Syria 380 10 Russian Federation 335 9 1,650 47.9 Estonia 40 Afghanistan 10 25 Georgia 5 13 Russian Federation 5 13 25 20.0 Finland 4,915 Somalia 1,150 23 Iraq 1,130 23 Russian Federation 585 12 2,650 36.2 France 47,625 Kosovo 4580 10 Sri Lanka 3900 8 Russian Federation 3,785 8 35,295 14.3 Germany 31,810 Iraq 7,065 22 Afghanistan 3,455 11 Kosovo 1,790 6 26,780 36.5 Greece 15,925 Pakistan 3715 23 Georgia 2170 14 Bangladesh 1,810 11 14,350 1.1 Hungary 4,665 Kosovo 1,785 38 Afghanistan 1,195 26 Serbia 535 11 1,805 21.6 Ireland 2,690 Nigeria 570 21 Pakistan 260 10 China 195 7 4,040 25.5 Italy 17,470 Nigeria 3,975 23 Somalia 1,600 9 Pakistan 1,355 8 22,000 38.4 Latvia 60 Afghanistan 20 33 Uzbekistan 10 17 Syria 5 8 40 25.0 Lithuania 450 Russian Federation 245 54 Georgia 75 17 Sri Lanka 20 4 145 27.6 Luxembourg 480 Kosovo 130 27 Iraq 65 14 Bosnia-Herzegovina 35 7 465 23.7 Malta 2,385 Somalia 1,445 61 Nigeria 280 12 Eritrea 270 11 2,575 65.6 Netherlands 16,140 Somalia 6,025 37 Iraq 2,165 13 Afghanistan 1,400 9 16,355 48.3 Poland 10,595 Russian Federation 5,725 54 Georgia 4,180 39 Armenia 150 1 6,580 38.4 Portugal 140 Eritrea 20 14 Guinea 20 14 Mauritania 15 11 95 52.6 Romania 965 Moldova 145 15 Pakistan 110 11 Afghanistan 90 9 540 21.3 Slovakia 810 Pakistan 170 21 Georgia 100 12 Moldova 75 9 315 57.1 Slovenia 200 Bosnia-Herzegovina 40 20 Kosovo 30 15 Serbia 20 10 130 15.4 Spain 3,005 Nigeria 460 15 Côte d'Ivoire 305 10 Colombia 255 8 4,480 7.8 Sweden 24,175 Somalia 5,915 24 Iraq 2,310 10 Afghanistan 1,695 7 23,930 29.6 United Kingdom 30,290 Zimbabwe 7,505 25 Afghanistan 3,590 12 Iran 2,175 7 31,040 26.9

TOTAL EU-27 222,930 169,325 24.6

1. Firts instance applications. 2. Percentage of accepted applications over firts instance decisions. Source: ACNUR and Eurospat Produced by: CIDOB