Emmaus International supports the appeal launched by French Coordination for Asylum Rights (CFDA) calling for the Dublin regulation to be shelved. Based on the principle that asylum applications must be filed in the country in which people arrive, the system is unfair, both for the countries that receive the most applications as well as for asylum seekers themselves.
Whilst the European Union is deciding on the distribution of asylum seekers amongst the Member States (relocalisation), French organisations are calling, alongside CFDA, for the Dublin regulation to be shelved.
The European Union recently suggested the launch of an exceptional "relocation" program for 40,000 Syrians and Eritreans in the various Member States. This proposal seeks to relieve Italy and Greece of the burden of receiving the large numbers of asylum seekers who are arriving in both these countries. Most of all, it underscores the unsuitability of the “Dublin III” regulation to the European asylum system. The Dublin regulation mechanism provides that asylum claims must be processed in the asylum seeker’s first European country of arrival. This rule inevitably attracts asylum seekers to those very countries, which form the EU’s external border (such as Greece, Italy and Poland).
This is unfair both to these countries (as the current situation demonstrates) and to asylum seekers themselves. Depending on where applications are filed, the conditions in which asylum seekers are received and the protection recognition rates differ greatly.
In its report on the management policy of EU external borders and the impact on migrants’ human rights, the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants pointed out the "systemic failure of the Dublin mechanism" and advocated "reversing the current logic by allowing asylum seekers to submit their application in the country of their choice within the European Union"1.
The European Commission and the French Minister of Interior nevertheless made statements on 27 May and 1 June, indicating that the Dublin III Regulation should continue to be applied.
Europe is thus perpetuating an unjust and faulty mechanism, which, in addition, is an obvious failure. For instance, in France, in 2012, only 17% of those asylum seekers who fell under the scope of the Regulation were actually transferred to the countries designated as "responsible" for their application.
Even if Member States agree to this relocation scheme, the European Commission’s attempts to correct the consequences of the Dublin Regulation will remain superficial and will fail to eradicate the persistent problem they are claiming to address.
CFDA has long recommended that the Dublin mechanism should be dropped.2 Just before the European Council meets on 25 and 26 June to address the situation of migrants in the Mediterranean, our organisations emphasise that the system by which EU Member States take responsibility for the processing of asylum applications must be reviewed in full. The principle must be that applicants can choose the country in which their asylum application will be processed.
Moreover, a mechanism needs to be set up to support Member States according to how many asylum seekers they host.
________________________________________
Signatories of the appeal:
The following organisations are signatories and members of CFDA:
ACAT (Action des Chrétiens pour l’Abolition de la Torture)
APSR (Association d’accueil aux Médecins et Personnels de Santé Réfugiés en France)
ARDHIS (Association pour la Reconnaissance des Droits des personnes Homosexuelles et transsexuelles à l’Immigration et au Séjour)
Centre Primo Levi (soins et soutien aux victimes de la torture et des violences politiques)
Comede (Comité médical pour les exilés)
Dom’Asile
ELENA France (Association d’avocats liés au Conseil Européen pour les Réfugiés et Exilés)
FASTI (Fédération des associations de solidarité avec tous-te-s les immigré-e-s)
GAS (Groupe accueil solidarité)
GISTI (Groupe d’information et de soutien des immigré.e.s)
JRS-France (Jesuite Refugee Service)
La Cimade (Service oecuménique d’entraide)
LDH (Ligue des droits de l’Homme)
MDM (Médecins du Monde)
MRAP (Mouvement contre le racisme et pour l’amitié entre les peuples)
Secours Catholique (Caritas France)
The following organisations are also supporting this appeal:
Action Tunisienne
ADDE (Avocats pour la Défense des Droits des Etrangers)
AmiS (Aide Migrants Solidarité Téteghem)
AMAR (Association Montalbanaise d’Aide Aux Réfugiés)
ARCAL-bn (Association des réfugiés du Calvados)
ATMF (Association Travailleurs Maghrébins de France)
CASAM (Collectif d’accueil des solliciteurs d’asile en Moselle)
Cedetim (Centre d’études et d’initiatives de solidarité internationale)
CFDA 44 (Coordination pour les demandeurs d’asile en Loire-Atlantique)
CRID (Centre de recherche et d’information pour le développement )
CSP 75 (Coordination 75 des sans papiers)
Diel
Emmaüs Dunkerque
Emmaüs Europe
Emmaüs France
Emmaüs International
Fédération de l’Entraide Protestante
FNARS (Fédération nationale des associations d’accueil et de réinsertion sociale)
FORIM Forum des Organisations de Solidarité Internationale issues des Migrations
Français langue d’accueil
France Amérique Latine
IPAM (Initiatives pour un autre monde)
L’Auberge des Migrants (Calais)
Le Réveil Voyageur (Calais)
Mddm
Mouvement de la Paix
Organisation pour une Citoyenneté Universelle
R.C. I. (Réseau chrétien Immigrés)
Réseau Foi & Justice Afrique Europe
Salam Nord/Pas-de-Calais
Syndicat de la magistrature
1 Report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, Banking on mobility over a generation: follow-up to the regional study on the management of the external borders of the European Union and its impact on the human rights of migrants, 8 may 2015, http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G15/092/49/PDF/G1509249.pdf?OpenElement
2 CFDA, minimum conditions to make asylum an effective right, January 2013, http://cfda.rezo.net/10%20points.html
