Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/618165
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 20 DECEMBER 2015 18 MEPS this week will debate a working docu- ment on the effective implementation of the Common European Asylum System drafted by MEPs Roberta Metsola (EPP-Malta) and Cecile Kashetu Kyenge (S&D-Italy). The debate takes place in the shadow of numerous border closures all over the EU, prompted by the wave of migration from Syria, and ties in with the thorny issue of border control, ensuring human rights at the external frontiers for migrants and asylum seekers, and preserving Schengen. European Commission President Jean- Claude Juncker told the Parliament Wednes- day that the Schengen area will be protected, tying his new proposal for a European Bor- der and Coast Guard to the survival of the passport-free zone. "We want to defend eve- rything that Schengen represents," Juncker said. "As we prepare for a new year, our de- termination is stronger than ever. Let me tell you, Schengen is here to stay." But apart from strengthening border con- trols, MEPs must also decide on a uniform package of asylum laws that can guarantee human rights for migrants and refugees seeking protection, and also to ensure a fair redistribution of the influx. In their document, Metsola and Kyenge say that further steps are still necessary to ensure that the CEAS could become a truly uniform system. "The rapporteurs believe that, in the fu- ture, criteria on which reloca- t i o n is based should be built di- rectly into the EU's stand- ard rules for allocating re- sponsibility. In the future revision of the Dublin rules, it is important to reflect on the value of describing cer- tain asylum- seekers as ' a p p l i c a n t s in clear need of internation- al protection', since those migrants and refugees who do not fall into that category will still have to be dealt with by the Member State of first arrival which is responsible under the current Dublin system. "Those Member States of first arrival therefore have the more complicated asy- lum claims (and appeals), longer periods of reception, and the task of organizing and coordinating returns after applications are rejected." The two MEPs say that if the current Dub- lin system – which places undue burden on border states like Malta – is to be revised, one option would be for it to establish a central collection of applications at EU level – view- ing each asylum-seeker as someone seeking asylum in the EU as a whole rather than in an individual member state, and establish a central system for the allocation of respon- sibility for any persons seeking asylum in the Union. "Such a system could provide for a certain relative threshold per Member State, above which no further allocation of responsibility is made until the remaining Member States have met their own threshold. Such a cen- tral allocation mechanism could conceivably help in deterring secondary movements as all Member States would be fully involved in the centralized system and no longer have individual responsibility for the allocation of applicants to other Member States. "The fundamental values related to fam- ily unity and the best interests of the child should be firmly incorporated in any new system. A future system could function on the basis of a number of Union 'hot spots' from where Union distribution should take place." 18 Can the spirit of Schengen prevail? THE free movement of persons is a fun- damental right guaranteed by the EU to its citizens. It entitles every EU citizen to travel, work and live in any EU country without special formalities. In 1985 in Schengen (a small village in Luxembourg) member states signed for a gradual abolition of checks at common borders, followed by 1990 Convention implementing that Agreement. The implementation of the Schengen Agreements started in 1995, initially involving seven EU States. Today, the Schengen Area encompasses most EU States, except for Bulgaria, Croatia, Cy- prus, Ireland, Romania and the United Kingdom. However, Bulgaria and Ro- mania are currently in the process of joining the Schengen Area. Of non-EU States, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein have joined the Schengen Area. Any person, irrespective of nationality, may cross the internal borders without being subjected to border checks. How- ever, police can carry out checks also at the internal borders and in border areas, provided that such checks are not equiv- alent to border checks. This is valid for cases when, in particular, the checks do not have border control as an objective and are based on general police infor- mation and experience. If there is a serious threat to public policy or internal security, a Schengen country may exceptionally temporarily reintroduce border control at its internal borders for, in principle, a limited period of no more than thirty days. If such con- trols are reintroduced, the other Schen- gen countries, the European Parliament and the Commission should be informed, as should the public. Conditions for joining the Schengen Area Joining the Schengen Area is not mere- ly a political decision. Countries must also fulfil a list of pre-conditions, such as be prepared and have the capacity to take responsibility for controlling the external borders on behalf of the other Schengen States and for issuing uniform Schengen visas and share information on border passage. Strengthening the Common European Asylum System and revising Dublin "Revising Dublin: One option would be to establish a central collection of applications at EU level – viewing each asylum- seeker as someone seeking asylum in the EU as a whole rather than in an individual member state, and establish a central system for the allocation of responsibility in the Union" Part 5 in our series on the European Parliament Inside the EP IS Schengen in trouble? European Commission President Jean- Claude Juncker has insisted that the treas- ured Schengen area can survive thanks to a revamped border control agency that could carry out systematic checks on everyone entering the EU through an external frontier, including EU nationals. He described it as "the costs of a riskier world and we cannot avoid them." Belgian MEP Guy Verhofstadt, the lead- er of the Alliance of Liberals and Demo- crats for Europe group in the Parliament, has warned that "without it, Schengen is finished." Refugees crossing into the EU increased dramatically, with irregular border cross- ings detected so far in 2015 at 1.55 mil- lion, considerably exceeding the total number of irregular border crossings during the 2009-2014 period (813,044). They have mainly entered through the eastern Mediterranean (716,202 detec- tions), the Western Balkans (667,147) and the central Mediterranean (144,300). Many of those arriving in the EU are flee- ing conflicts in their region and therefore request international protection. The refugee crisis has not only resulted in massive arrivals at the external bor- ders, but also in significant secondary movements inside the Schengen area, since the applicants for international protection were travelling further to the member states of their preference instead of having their applications examined by the member states responsible under the Dublin rules. But to prevent this from happening, the member states of first entry into the EU should register the applicants and have reception conditions in line with EU law and fundamental rights: if they don't, migrants will travel to other member states. These shortcomings led to temporary reintroduction of controls at the German, Austrian, Slovenian, Hungarian, Swedish and Norwegian internal borders: a last- resort measure explicitly foreseen in the Schengen Borders Code (SBC) to be used in the event of a serious threat to public policy and internal security both in cases requiring immediate action and for fore- seeable events. It is limited in time and must remain proportionate to the serious threat it seeks to address.