Malta recently abstained from a vote on new EU asylum and migration regulations. Neither the Maltese government nor human rights NGOs are pleased with the pact, albeit for different reasons. Sarah Carabott looks into what the deal will mean for Malta.
The proposed regulations will increase Malta’s migrant reception responsibilities but do not guarantee other EU member states will help the island by hosting asylum seekers who land here.
A spokesperson for the Home Affairs Ministry told Times of Malta the current asylum system already placed onerous obligations on frontline states, with Malta being constantly exposed to the risk of sudden large numbers of arrivals.
Throughout the negotiations for the new rules, Malta, therefore, insisted on a permanent and mandatory solidarity mechanism that effectively alleviates the burden on states facing migratory pressure.
The EU proposal allows states the option of providing support in one of two ways: they can either share the hosting of asylum-seekers by taking in migrants who arrive at the bloc’s outer rim or pay €20,000 per person into a fund managed by Brussels.
Following the June 8 vote, the European Council will now negotiate with the European Parliament to reach a common position that will become law. It is expected that parliament will concede to the approved proposals.
“While there are positive improvements, instead of alleviating the disproportionate burden faced by frontline states, the [approved proposals] will increase existing responsibilities in relation to the Dublin criteria by extending the period of responsibility and shortening time limits that will be highly burdensome for small administrations,” the spokesperson said.
The proposed mandatory border procedures may look good on paper but are unlikely to function effectively when it comes to maritime borders, the spokesperson said, adding they will neither prevent arrivals nor reduce secondary movements.
He said that while solidarity was mandatory, it remained flexible and “did not provide the necessary assurances that the identified needs – in terms of relocation but not only – will be fully met”.
“The mechanism as approved by the Council of Home Affairs Ministers will still lead to shortfalls in terms of solidarity, which could be significant, and that will ultimately translate into continued pressures for frontline states.”
Malta is not the only country to express disappointment with the deal. Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia also abstained, while Poland and Hungary voted against the proposals.
Interestingly, in its reaction to the pact, the European Council on Refugees and Exiles similarly said the Med5 (Malta, Italy, Cyprus, Greece and Spain) were among the losers in this deal, as they will have to manage the border procedures and, while solidarity is mandatory, it is flexible, meaning relocation is not prioritised. In a statement, the council asked: “It all begs the question: what have they really been offered in return?”
Aditus director Neil Falzon Falzon said the new rules confirmed the EU wasn't interested in protecting people fleeing war, while JRS Malta director Katrine Camilleri believes the pact is 'not good news'. Photos: Chris Sant Fournier/JRS Malta‘Malta’s ongoing human rights’ violations endorsed by EU law’
When contacted, Aditus director Neil Falzon said that for Malta, the new package “spells serious trouble and headaches”.
Although it is the first time that the idea of solidarity is being included in a legal document, it is clear this is not what Malta has been lobbying for in the past 20 years, he told Times of Malta.
“Instead, Malta will be forced to become the EU’s southern-most border checkpoint required to spend millions in establishing and running new structures and systems.
“We are worried that Malta’s ongoing human rights’ violations will be embraced and endorsed by EU law. The abysmal state of Malta’s asylum systems will be rubber-stamped, and refugees will be stripped of the very small legal protection they might enjoy today. More children will be detained, more refugees will be sent home without a proper assessment of their claims, more violence will be suffered.
New pact spells serious trouble and headaches- Neil Falzon
Falzon said the new rules confirmed the EU was not interested in protecting people fleeing war and persecution.
They will allow states to lock up thousands of people at its borders and instead of providing real support to states struggling to cope, the new regime will isolate even more people at the EU’s borders by “denying them a proper asylum procedure and trying to get rid of them as soon as possible”.
JRS Malta director Katrine Camilleri similarly believes the pact is “not good news” for people fleeing in search of protection.
“The pact makes the rules regulating the asylum procedure more complicated and restrictive than ever and increases the likelihood of exclusion from protection and detention, even for children and vulnerable people.
“The pact is also worrying for countries like Malta, at the border of the EU, as it left the Dublin rules on responsibility more or less intact and, although the pact makes ‘solidarity’ mandatory, it leaves it up to states to decide what form the solidarity will take.
In practice, this means that states can decide whether they want to relocate asylum seekers or provide other forms of support, like financial support.”