# EUR-Lex - 52004IP0100(01) - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52004IP0100(01)

**European Parliament resolution on asylum procedure and protection in regions of origin (2004/2121(INI)) **

*
Official Journal 226 E , 15/09/2005 P. 0226 - 0232 *

P6_TA(2004)0100

Single procedure for the European Asylum System

European Parliament resolution on asylum procedure and protection in regions of origin (2004/2121(INI))

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the managed entry in the EU of persons in need of international protection and the enhancement of the protection capacity of the regions of origin — "Improving access to durable solutions" (COM(2004)0410),

- having regard to the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament "A more efficient common European asylum system: the single procedure as the next step" (COM(2004)0503),

- having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1948, in particular Article 14 thereof,

- having regard to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, signed in Rome on 4 November 1950 and its additional protocols,

- having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union [1], solemnly proclaimed on 7 December 2000, in particular Articles 1, 18 and 19 thereof,

- having regard to the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, adopted by the European Convention on 13 June and 10 July 2003, submitted to the President of the European Council in Rome on 18 July 2003, and endorsed by the Intergovernmental Conference meeting at the level of Heads of State and Government during the European Council meeting on 17 and 18 June 2004, in particular Articles II-61, II-78, II-79 and III-266,

- having regard to the Geneva Convention relating to the status of refugees of 28 July 1951, supplemented by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967,

- having regard to the consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union [2], in particular the fourth indent of Article 2 and Article 6,

- having regard to the consolidated version of the Treaty establishing the European Community [3], in particular Article 63,

- having regard to the Action Plan of the Council and the Commission on how to best implement the provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam on an area of freedom, security and justice [4], in particular paragraphs 8, 32, 33, 34, 36 and 37 thereof,

- having regard to the conclusions of the European Council in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999, in particular those set out in points 13, 14 and 15,

- having regard to the conclusions of the European Council in Laeken on 14 and 15 December 2001, in particular those set out in points 39 and 40,

- having regard to the conclusions of the European Council in Seville on 21 and 22 June 2002, in particular those set out in points 26, 27, 28, 29, 33 and 34,

- having regard to the conclusions of the European Council in Thessaloniki on 19 and 20 June 2003, in particular those set out in points 24, 25, 26 and 27,

- having regard to the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament "Towards a common asylum procedure and a uniform status, valid throughout the Union, for persons granted asylum" (COM(2000)0755),

- having regard to the Agenda or Programme for Protection, adopted by the Executive Committee of the UNHCR and welcomed by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 2002 after worldwide consultations on international protection,

- having regard to the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the common asylum policy and the Agenda for protection (COM(2003)0152),

- having regard to the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament "Towards more accessible, equitable and managed asylum systems" (COM(2003)0315),

- having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A6-0051/2004),

A. whereas point 26 of the conclusions of the European Council in Thessaloniki called on the Commission "to explore all parameters in order to ensure more orderly and managed entry in the EU of persons in need of international protection and to examine ways and means to enhance the protection capacity of regions of origin with a view to presenting to the Council, before June 2004, a comprehensive report suggesting measures to be taken, including legal implications",

B. whereas the Commission's two communications which are the subject of this resolution should be considered together, since although the reasons behind them are different, they constitute the Commission's response to points 26 and 27 respectively of the conclusions of the Thessaloniki European Council, and tackle the premises and basic objectives of a possible new approach to better managed, more accessible and fair asylum systems, exploring new ways of achieving the gradual approach defined at Tampere,

C. whereas the Geneva Convention and the international obligation to receive any person requesting asylum at borders should remain the rule,

D. whereas there is a need to conclude agreements between the EU and third countries in order to improve access to durable solutions for refugees or persons in need of protection or political asylum based on the principle of shared responsibility,

E. whereas protracted refugee situations and lengthy processing of asylum claims may undermine the personal security of genuine refugees, especially in crisis situations, and impel them to resort to illegal means of travel,

1. Urges the EU and the Member States to ensure that those in need of protection may enter the EU safely and have their claims properly processed, and to ensure strict adherence to standards of international human rights and refugee law and in particular to the principle of non-refoulement (i.e. that states must allow bona fide applicants for asylum to enter);

2. Deplores the fact that the progress made in the adoption of the legislative programme for the first stage of a European common asylum system defined in the conclusions of the Tampere European Council has been delayed, that harmonisation is based on the lowest common denominator of the Member States, and that the Council was unable until 29 April 2004 to reach a political agreement on the amended proposal for a directive on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status [5];

3. Thanks the Commission for submitting its communication COM(2004)0410, in which it proposes, in addition to the current European common asylum policy, both measures to develop orderly and better organised entry into the EU of persons in need of international protection and measures to step up protection capacity in the regions of origin;

4. Given that an appropriate approach to asylum systems requires precise knowledge of their characteristics and scale in the various Member States, requests that the EU should have its own sources of information on migratory flows and hence considers it necessary to strengthen the European Migration Observatory as an instrument for centralising asylum statistics in the EU;

5. Believes that much further work remains to be done to safeguard the EU as a single asylum space and ensure that our citizens have confidence in a system which acts fairly, efficiently and promptly both in giving protection to those who need it and in dealing with those without protection requirements;

6. Considers that the still only partial establishment of the first stage of the European common asylum policy presents serious structural shortcomings which threaten Europe's humanitarian tradition, and that in order to improve the management of asylum in the context of an enlarged Europe it is necessary to achieve, by means of gradual application, objectives which are to complement rather than replace the European common asylum policy envisaged at Tampere; these are as follows:

(a) to improve the quality of asylum decision-making in the European Union,

(b) to be a key player in ensuring capacity-building and to help countries provide effective protection for asylum-seekers and refugees, using international human rights standards as a benchmark,

(c) to deal with applications for protection at a level as close as possible to needs and to regulate safe access to the EU by means of orderly and managed entry for some of the persons in need of international protection,

(d) to observe the principle of solidarity and to ensure the fair sharing of responsibility,

(e) to develop an integrated approach with a view to establishing, in the area of asylum and return, a prompt and efficient decision-making process;

7. Stresses the need for cooperation between third countries and the EU so as to ensure a comprehensive and balanced EU asylum and migration policy; considers that partnership with third countries can be implemented through existing instruments, such as the European Neighbourhood Policy and the forthcoming individual Country Action Plans relating thereto, designed in a flexible and situation-specific manner, as well as other Community programmes — the aid to uprooted people in Asia and Latin America [6], MEDA [7], CARDS [8], EDF [9] and Aeneas Programme [10];

8. Is convinced that one of the instruments for guaranteeing more orderly and better managed entry into the EU of persons in need of international protection may consist in a Community-wide system of resettlement, based on respect for individual wishes and the voluntary participation of all the Member States in the system, whereby such persons would be transferred from a first host country to a Member State, where they would be guaranteed protection and would have prospects of integration and autonomy, with the UNHCR taking part in selecting and forwarding specific cases; to this end calls on the EU to draw up an appropriate legal instrument guaranteeing the prompt application of such a system;

9. Rejects the "outsourcing" of the application process by sending applicants for refugee status to a third country, not least because it makes it more difficult for applicants to be properly represented and removes the process from democratic oversight;

10. Considers that a resettlement mechanism constitutes the way to offer rapid access to protection without refugees falling victim to illegal immigration and human-trafficking networks or having to wait years before their status is recognised;

11. Considers that the resettlement programme is an instrument aimed at responding to the specific protection needs of refugees whose lives, freedom, safety, health and fundamental rights are endangered in the countries where they have taken refuge;

12. Considers that in resettlement schemes particular attention should be paid to those considered most vulnerable in such circumstances and most in need of help: for example, victims of rape and sexual assault, pregnant women, unaccompanied minors, disabled persons, human rights activists or those persecuted for political reasons; flexibility and specific treatment are needed in the examination of individual situations and such an approach would represent real added-value at the EU level;

13. Considers that centres for the holding of would-be migrants in the country of final transit have no place in the consideration of durable solutions in the regions of origin, nor in offering sanctuary to those in need of international protection; indeed, believes that, while such centres may seem to provide a short-term solution to certain migration pressures, they raise many questions about the ability to meet international obligations in terms of human rights, not least on account of the very poor human rights records of the regimes of many of those transit countries;

14. Trusts that such resettlement programmes, if properly managed and adequately resourced, and sensibly publicised by Member States and the EU, can assist in the development of a public understanding of refugees and their reasons for seeking protection in the countries receiving those refugees and of others in need of international protection and in enhancing the efficiency of the EU in combating human trafficking;

15. Holds that the active development of such understanding is essential to combating all forms of discrimination, racism and xenophobia within the EU;

16. Calls on the EU to demonstrate in a visible and consistent way its readiness to assist third countries in the regions of origin to enhance their protection capacities in accordance with to the UNHCR Convention Plus initiative and other recommendations and to exclude the possibility of the financing of holding camps or any other centre limiting the personal freedom of asylum seekers;

17. Considers that the additional resources required for the improvement of support in the regions of origin must be additional monies allocated and coordinated from existing budget lines and not a re-allocation of the existing aid and development budget; considers that this should be taken into account in deliberations on the Financial Perspective; considers that additional and coordinated funding for the UNHCR will also be necessary given the role it will be asked to play in this process;

18. Calls on the EU to ensure that the necessary budgetary means, other than those already envisaged as development aid to third countries, are made available to enhance the financial and institutional capacity, for protecting refugees, in developing countries on the condition that those means are not employed to establish holding camps or any other centre limiting the personal freedom of asylum seekers;

19. Considers it necessary for there to be clear lines of responsibility and accountability for the agencies involved;

20. Considers that a decisive common foreign and security policy committing the EU as a matter of priority to the resolution of long-term conflicts and to conflict prevention is essential in order to help those seeking protection; therefore welcomes the Commission's proposals to bring forward EU Regional Protection Programmes and asks to be involved in their development and in the necessary assessment and monitoring of their implementation;

21. Considers that such Protection Programmes must contain safeguards against the premature return of refugees, based on the concept of the safe third country;

22. Calls on the Union, for the purposes of dealing with cases of people in need of immediate and urgent protection, to investigate existing problems with Protected Entry Procedures (PEPs) where abuse has been reported by Member States and to further explore the possibility of a legal instrument defining and establishing the elements of a PEP system, which would consist in allowing a third-country national to submit an application for asylum, or another form of international protection, to a potential host Member State, but from outside its territory, and to be able to obtain a provisional or definitive entry permit;

23. Stresses that enhancing protection capacity in the regions of origin and creating the PEPs lead to ensuring an orderly and anticipated manner of entry into the EU, considers that the existing right of application for asylum upon spontaneous arrival in a Member State is to be maintained;

24. Stresses that it is important for the EU to share responsibility with third countries, and in particular with the countries of first asylum, for the handling of refugees and that more effective cooperation is needed for the purposes of stepping up the protection capacity of the countries accommodating refugees, to enable them to become stable providers of real protection;

25. Believes that the European Union should be better prepared to provide urgent assistance to the countries neighbouring states in crisis, in order to help them to address, in accordance with international standards, sudden and large-scale migrations resulting from crisis situations;

26. Recognises the value of supporting those countries which receive the majority of those seeking sanctuary and considers it important that the conditions offered there meet at least those outlined by the Commission in points (a) to (e) of paragraph 45 of communication COM(2004)0410;

27. Considers such support in the regions of origin to be a complement to a common asylum procedure within the EU based upon high standards of delivery and in full recognition of our international obligations, and therefore states that such support cannot be a replacement for such a procedure within the EU;

28. Considers that investing in durable solutions will require considerable coordination between different departments and agencies of the Commission, and especially those concerned with development, justice and home affairs, trade and external relations; believes that the Commission should communicate its proposals for such cooperation to the Parliament as soon as possible and report regularly to Parliament on the progress of such cooperation;

29. Welcomes the Commission's submission of its communication COM(2004)0503, the purpose of which is to develop the process which would close the protection gap and lead to the effective implementation of the first stage of the common asylum policy;

30. Welcomes the proposal to "front-load" the assessment procedure to include all relevant information but stresses that this must include the application of full-country information from a variety of sources, high-quality training for those deciding on applications and the full legal representation of applicants, information provided in a language comprehensible to the applicant and the right to in-country appeal;

31. To improve the quality of asylum decision-making in the future, proposes that systems be put in place to monitor the outcome for those returned to their country of origin when their claim has been deemed unfounded, in order to assess whether correct decisions have been made;

32. Stresses the need to devise harmonised approaches, general action plans and special agreements capable of formulating and guaranteeing effective responses for the protection of refugees and/or achieving lasting solutions in the countries of origin, strategies which take account of best practices in the management of administrative acts and allow the exchange of information on the countries of origin and provenance;

33. Backs the proposal for a single procedure for international protection, since it is convinced that a single procedure administered by a single competent authority will save economic resources, but above all will make the procedure swifter and more efficient and provide better guarantees for persons seeking protection, since the single authority would assess the international protection needs of the applicant, either in order to grant him refugee status or subsidiary protection or, if appropriate, turn down his application;

34. Also requests that the EU should have an accelerated procedure for granting asylum, taking not more than 6 months, which would make it easier to deal with unjustified applications and thus streamline formalities for those which actually meet the requirements for the granting of asylum;

35. Requests that, in cases where any of the types of status of international protection should be refused because the requirements are not met, the unfavourable decision should be duly reasoned and communicated in writing in an authenticated document in a language comprehensible to the applicant;

36. Urges the Commission and the Council to reverse the return and readmission policy which paves the way for European charter flights to send back immigrants to countries of origin;

37. Is convinced that a single procedure would not adversely affect the status of refugees as envisaged in the Geneva Convention of 1951, if the application is examined by the same authority in a set order: the request would be examined on the basis of the reasons for protection laid down in the Geneva Convention, and if these were not applicable, it would be determined whether the reasons justifying the granting of subsidiary protection apply;

38. Expresses its deep concern at the serious situation which will inevitably arise in future if, on the one hand, Member States have to apply Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted [11], the scope of which covers the two types of international protection (refugees and subsidiary protection), whilst, on the other hand, the scope of the future directive on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status is confined to the examination of applications for international protection based on the reasons listed in the Geneva Convention of 1951 and the Protocol of 1967, since applications for subsidiary protection are outside its scope;

39. Calls on the European Union to take appropriate steps to ensure that the scope of the directive on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status is extended to cases of subsidiary protection, so as to give everybody the same procedural guarantees in all the Member States during the examination of their applications for international protection and the same opportunities to defend themselves and exercise their right to appeal against decisions which they consider unlawful, and that such appeals should have the effect of suspending the decision;

40. Is convinced that not extending the scope of the directive on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status to cases justifying requests for subsidiary protection would constitute an unjustifiable legal vacuum in the field of protection, the consequences of which would be aggravated by the fact that when the Member States grant international protection they do so on the basis of the reasons for subsidiary protection rather than on those justifying the application of the Geneva Convention relating to the status of refugees;

41. Demands that the Council indicate urgently when Parliament will be consulted again on the directive on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status and about any minimum common list of safe countries of origin;

42. Maintains that, as soon as possible after the preparatory stage, the European Union should adopt the legislative measures needed to adopt the whole legislative package envisaged in the Amsterdam Treaty and by the Tampere European Council for the creation of the first phase of a European common asylum policy, in order to ensure the fair and effective application of a single international protection procedure in all the Member States;

43. Sees no case for transferring responsibility for deciding asylum claims from the Member States to a central EU authority or EU asylum processing centres in view of the legal, practical and political difficulties;

44. Believes that integration is a fundamental part of any efficient asylum system and EU-wide resettlement schemes and that integration is a two-way process involving both the asylum-seeker and/or refugee and the host society;

45. Believes that an effective European asylum policy should be based on a common analysis of migratory phenomena and that the collection, exchange and use of up-to-date information and data on all relevant migratory developments are of importance;

46. Welcomes the establishment of the European Refugee Fund for 2005-2010 and stresses the urgent need for Member States to maintain adequate asylum systems and reception facilities in the run-up to the establishment of the common asylum procedure;

47. Believes the EU must do more to foster conditions which make it possible for asylum-seekers and refugees to undertake safe, dignified and sustainable voluntary returns;

48. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

[1] OJ C 364, 18.12.2000.

[2] OJ C 325, 24.12.2002, p. 5.

[3] OJ C 325, 24.12.2002, p. 33.

[4] OJ C 19, 23.1.1999, p. 1.

[5] OJ C 291 E, 26.11.2002, p. 143.

[6] OJ L 287, 31.10.2001, p. 3.

[7] OJ L 189, 30.7.1996, p. 1.

[8] OJ L 306, 7.12.2000, p. 1.

[9] OJ L 83, 1.4.2003, p. 1.

[10] OJ L 80, 18.3.2004, p. 1.

[11] OJ L 304, 30.9.2004, p. 12.

--------------------------------------------------