główne punkty

1

On October 16, the report “Taking Back Control from Brussels: The Renationalization of EU Migration and Asylum Policies”, prepared by Mathias Corvinus Collegium and the Migration Research Institute in cooperation with the Ordo Iuris Institute, was presented in Lisbon.

2

The report identifies the main obstacles to combating illegal immigration: the judicial activism of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the expansive interpretation of the non-refoulement principle by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the abuse of the right to asylum, and the low effectiveness of returns.

3

The authors recommend, among other things, opt-out clauses in the field of asylum and migration, an “exception clause” for national parliaments, and considering withdrawal from the jurisdiction of the ECtHR.

4

The new EU Return Regulation is a step in the right direction, but it is still based on the principle of non-refoulement and remains without prejudice to the Migration Pact.

5

According to Ordo Iuris, the Migration Pact will make the situation worse, as countries that effectively protect their borders will bear the costs of the policies of governments that encourage migrants to come to Europe.

On Friday, October 16, Lisbon hosted the presentation of the report “Taking Back Control from Brussels: The Renationalization of EU Migration and Asylum Policies”, prepared by Hungary’s Mathias Corvinus Collegium (MCC) and the Migration Research Institute in cooperation with the Ordo Iuris Institute. The panel discussion, organized at the invitation of politicians from the Chega party, drew a full house. Scheduled for an hour and a half, the meeting went on for two hours, and even then not everyone in the audience managed to ask their questions.

The event was organized by the foundation associated with the Patriots for Europe group in the European Parliament (Patriots for Europe Foundation) and hosted by the group’s Portuguese delegation, namely the Chega MEPs. Founded only seven years ago, the party is now the second-largest force in the Portuguese parliament and leads in the polls. The audience in the auditorium of the Orlando Ribeiro Library also included journalists and Chega members of parliament.

The panelists were: António Tânger Corrêa, a former Portuguese ambassador, vice president of Chega and Member of the European Parliament, vice chairman of the Patriots for Europe group in the European Parliament; Rodrigo Ballester, director of the Center for European Studies at Mathias Corvinus Collegium in Budapest; Viktor Marsai, Ph.D., executive director of the Migration Research Institute in Budapest; and Olivier Bault, director of the Communications Center of the Ordo Iuris Institute. The discussion was moderated by Pedro Frazão, a member of Portugal’s Assembly of the Republic and vice president of Chega.

Mass immigration as a pressing problem in Portugal

In recent years, mass immigration has become a pressing problem in Portugal. The speakers argued that no country will manage to bring the situation under control unless it takes matters into its own hands and reclaims the European Union’s powers in this area.

Obstacles to combating illegal immigration

Viktor Marsai presented the diagnosis contained in the report, focusing on the obstacles that currently prevent an effective fight against illegal immigration. The report points, among other things, to the judicial activism of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU), the expansive interpretation of the non-refoulement principle by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the abuse of the right to asylum, and the extremely low effectiveness of returns: only about one in five people ordered to leave the Union is actually removed from it. Countries of origin often refuse to take back their own nationals, and migrants released from detention disappear within the Schengen Area.

What we recommend to EU States

Rodrigo Ballester discussed the report’s recommendations for member states. The authors propose, among other things, granting opt-out clauses in the field of asylum and migration to member states that want them, modeled on those of Denmark and Ireland; introducing an “exception clause” allowing national parliaments to temporarily suspend the application of EU rules in a crisis; and considering withdrawal from the jurisdiction of the ECtHR. The practical proposals include restoring member states’ competence to conclude readmission agreements, making EU development aid legally conditional on third countries’ cooperation on returns, allowing illegal immigrants to be held in detention until removal decisions are enforced, processing asylum applications in safe third countries, and EU funding for barriers on the external borders.

The Migration Pact and the new Return Regulation

Olivier Bault responded to the argument that Brussels is changing course on its own and that renationalization is therefore no longer needed. The regulation establishing a common system for the return of third-country nationals staying illegally in the Union, finally adopted in early October, is a step in the right direction. It extends the maximum detention period to 30 months, provides for sanctions for refusal to cooperate, paves the way for return hubs in third countries, and provides for pressure on countries of origin through visa and trade policy. However, it does not change what matters most. The regulation is explicitly based on the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the Geneva Convention and its 1967 Protocol, and the principle of non-refoulement as interpreted by the courts in Luxembourg and Strasbourg. The prohibition on turning migrants back at the border remains in force, and states must still allow not only refugees but also so-called displaced persons to remain on their territory. Moreover, the new rules are “without prejudice” to the Migration Pact.

And the pact, the Ordo Iuris representative argued, will only make the situation worse. Under the solidarity mechanism, a state that effectively stops illegal immigration will have to accept relocated migrants or pay instead. Meanwhile, a government that encourages migrants to try their luck, such as Pedro Sánchez’s cabinet in Spain, knows that it will shift the costs of its policy onto others. Bault also recalled that the aim of the pact, as the European Commission itself wrote in its 2020 communication, is not to reduce immigration but to replace irregular routes with “legal pathways” better suited to the needs of the labor market. Without changing international refugee law, including the European Convention on Human Rights, the 1967 Protocol, the UN Convention against Torture and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, illegal immigration cannot be stopped. And among the 27 EU member states, this will not happen quickly enough. That is why the need to take back control at the national level remains as relevant as ever.

Part of a broader project

The presentation in Lisbon is part of a broader initiative by the Ordo Iuris Institute and MCC to restore the sovereignty of member states. Their joint proposal for a thorough reform of the EU, the “Great Reset,” has been presented in Warsaw, Budapest, Brussels, Madrid and Paris, while the Polish premiere of the report “Taking Back Control” took place in Warsaw in February. The report has also already been presented in Budapest and Brussels.

The arguments presented in Lisbon fell on fertile ground.

The report “Taking Back Control from Brussels: The Renationalization of EU Migration and Asylum Policies” can be downloaded here.

See also:

Source of cover photo: Ordo Iuris

Support us