Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL addressing situations of crisis and force majeure in the field of migration and asylum
Date: 2020-09-23
Institutions: Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: EU migration policy, foreign national, migration control, migratory movement, return migration, right of asylum, stateless person

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 23.9.2020  COM(2020) 613 final 2020/0277 (COD)  Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL addressing situations of crisis and force majeure in the field of migration and asylum (Text with EEA relevance)  
 
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

1.1. 

Reasons for and objectives of the proposal 

In September 2019, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced a New 
Pact  on  Migration  and  Asylum,  involving  a  comprehensive  approach  to  external  borders, 
asylum and return systems, the Schengen area of free movement and the external dimension. 

The Communication on a New Pact on Migration and Asylum, presented together with a set 
of  legislative  proposals,  including  this  proposal  addressing  situations  of  crisis  and  force 
majeure in the field of migration and asylum, represents a fresh start on migration. The aim is 
to  put  in  place  a  broad  framework  based  on  a  comprehensive  approach  to  migration 
management,  promoting  mutual  trust  among  Member  States.  Based  on  the  overarching 
principles of solidarity and a fair sharing of responsibility, the new Pact advocates integrated 
policy-making,  bringing  together  policies  in  the areas  of  asylum,  migration,  return,  external 
border protection and relations with third countries. 

The New Pact builds on the Commission proposals to reform the Common European Asylum 
System  from  2016  and  2018  and  it  adds  new  elements  to  ensure  the  balance  needed  for  a 
common  framework 
to  migration 
management  through  integrated-policy  making  in  the  field  of  asylum  and  migration 
management, including both its internal and external components. As part of this framework, 
it is necessary to put in place a system with tools necessary to deal with crisis situations and 
situations of force majeure. 

the  comprehensive  approach 

that  contributes 

to 

The  solidarity  mechanism  established  by  the  Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration 
Management  is  flexible  and  responsive  in  design  in  order  to  be  adjustable  to  the  different 
situations  presented  by  the  different  migratory  challenges  faced  by  the  Member  States,  by 
setting solidarity measures from among which Member States can choose to contribute. This 
new approach to solidarity provides continuous and diverse support to Member States under 
pressure  or  risk  of  pressure  and  includes  a  specific  process  to  address  the  specificities  of 
disembarkations  following  search  and  rescue  (SAR)  operations.  In  the  same  vein,  the 
procedural  rules  set  out  in  the  new  Asylum  Procedures  Regulation  will  increase  the  overall 
efficiency and coherence of the asylum and migration management systems. Taken together 
with the wider set of measures that should be applied as part of the comprehensive approach 
to  asylum  and  migration  management,  the  Union  and  its  Member  States  should  be  better 
prepared to avoid that a situation of crisis arises in the field of migration and asylum. 

However, it cannot  be excluded that a situation of crisis  will arise given the various factors 
operating  outside  the  control  of  the  Union  and  its  Member  States,  as  recent  experience 
demonstrates. As our experience during the 2015 refugee crisis also shows, the Union needs a 
structured  approach  to  handle  crisis  in  order  to  avoid  ad  hoc  responses.  It  is  therefore 
appropriate  that  the  legislative  framework  operating  in  this  field  is  complemented  by  an 
instrument  that  ensures  that  the  Union  has  at  its disposal  specific  rules  that  can  address  the 
exceptional  situation  of  crisis  in  an  effective  manner,  complementing  the  compulsory 
solidarity  mechanism  and  the  procedures  that  normally  would  apply.  Such  rules  would 
provide for appropriate procedural rules and derogations and a rapid triggering of solidarity to 
the benefit of one or more Member States to respond to crisis situations of such a magnitude 
that  put  under  significant  strain  even  well  prepared  and  functioning  asylum  and  migration 
management systems. 

EN 

1 

  EN 

 
This crisis instrument therefore covers exceptional situations of mass influx of third-country 
nationals or stateless persons arriving irregularly in a Member State, being of such a scale and 
nature  that  it  would  render  a  Member  State’s  asylum,  reception  or  return  system  non-
functional and which risk having serious consequences for the functioning of, or result in the 
impossibility  of  applying,  the  Common  European  Asylum  System  and  the  migration 
management system of the Union. Situations where there is a risk of such arrivals will also be 
covered.  The  proposed  Regulation  also  addresses  situations  of  force  majeure  in  the  field  of 
asylum and migration management within the Union. It provides the necessary adaptation to 
the EU rules on the asylum and return procedures as well as to the solidarity mechanisms set 
out in the Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management]. 

This  proposal,  together  with  the  proposal  amending  the  2016  proposal  for  an  Asylum 
Procedures  Regulation1,  the  new  proposal  for  a  Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration 
Management2, the proposal introducing a screening3 and the proposal amending the Eurodac 
proposal4,  establish  the  legislative  framework  that  puts  this  comprehensive  approach  to 
migration and asylum management into practice. 

The  proposal  amending  the  2016  proposal  for  a  recast  Eurodac  Regulation5  puts  in  place  a 
clear and consistent link between specific individuals and the procedures they are subjected to 
in  order  to  better  assist  with  the  control  of  irregular  migration  and  the  detection  of 
unauthorised  movements.  It  also  supports  the  implementation  of  the  new  solidarity 
mechanism  established  by  the  Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration  Management,  provides 
the  necessary  consequential  amendments  that  will  allow  Eurodac  to  function  within  the 
interoperability  framework,  and  will  support  Member  States  in  monitoring  the  granting  of 
assistance for voluntary return and reintegration. 

The  reform  aims  to  tackle  the  fact  that,  despite  significantly  increased  cooperation  at  EU 
level, including as regards support from EU agencies, Member States’ asylum, reception and 
return  systems  remain  largely  not  harmonised.  This  creates  inefficiencies  and  has  the 
unintended  consequence  of  not  providing  the  same  fair  treatment  to  asylum  seekers 
throughout  Europe  and  incentivising  therefore  the  movement  of  large  numbers  of  migrants 
across  Europe  to  seek  better  conditions  and  prospects  for  their  stay.  In  this  context,  the 
Commission  supports 
the 
Qualification  Regulation, 
the  EU  Resettlement 
Framework Regulation and the EU Agency for Asylum Regulation. These should be finally 
adopted as soon as possible. The negotiations on the recast Return Directive6 should also be 
swiftly  concluded,  together  with  the  reform  of  the  Common  European  Asylum  System,  to 
ensure  that  EU  rules  are  successful  in  preventing  absconding,  providing  assistance  to 
voluntary  returns  and  streamlining  administrative  and  judicial  procedures,  reinforcing  the 
effective functioning of the asylum and migration management systems. 

the  provisional  political  agreements  already  reached  on 

the  Reception  Conditions  Directive, 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 

OJ L […], […], p. […]. 
OJ L […], […], p. […]. 
OJ L […], […], p. […]. 
OJ L […], […], p. […]. 
OJ L […], […], p. […]. 
COM(2018) 634 final. 

EN 

2 

  EN 

 
                                                 
The overall objective of the proposal is to provide for the necessary adaptation of the rules on 
asylum and return procedures (Asylum Procedures Regulation and Return Directive7) as well 
as  of  the  solidarity  mechanism  established  in  the  Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration 
Management, in order to ensure that Member States are able to address situations of crisis and 
force  majeure  in  the  field  of  asylum  and  migration  management  within  the  EU.  Such 
situations  may  occur  very  quickly  and  be  of  such  a  scale  and  nature  that  they  require  a 
specific  set  of  tools  in  order  to  be  effectively  addressed.  For  this  purpose,  a  simplified 
procedure  and  shortened  timeframes  are  set  out  for  triggering  the  compulsory  solidarity 
mechanism  provided  for  situations  of  pressure  in  the  Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration 
Management. The rules and measures set out in this proposal to address a situation of crisis 
are  in  addition  to  the  operational  and  technical  support  the  European  Union  Agency  for 
Asylum can provide8 in case the Member State’s asylum or reception systems are subject to 
disproportionate pressure. 

Moreover,  the  solidarity  mechanism  procedure  in  situations  of  crisis  provides  for  a  wider 
scope for relocation and reinforces the possibility for Member States to provide assistance to 
each other in carrying out returns, in the form of return sponsorship. According to the normal 
rules  established  in  the  Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration  Management,  Member  States 
providing  return  sponsorship  commit  to  returning  irregular  migrants  on  behalf  of  another 
Member  State,  carrying  out  all  the  activities  necessary  for  this  purpose  directly  from  the 
territory of the benefitting Member State (e.g. return counselling, leading policy dialogue with 
third  countries,  providing  support  for  assisted  voluntary  return  and  reintegration).  When 
return is not finalised within eight months, the irregular migrants would be transferred to the 
territory of the sponsoring Member State in view of finalising the enforcement of return. The 
return sponsorship in situations of crisis provided for in this proposal differs from the one in 
the Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management because the obligation to transfer the 
irregular migrant is triggered if the person concerned does not return or is not removed within 
four months. 

The  proposal  also  includes  provisions  related  to  crisis  situations  which  allow  for  certain 
derogations  from  the  proposed  Asylum  Procedures  Regulation.  In  particular,  it  will  be 
possible to extend the scope of application of the border procedure to third-country nationals 
and  stateless  persons  whose  EU-wide  first  instance  recognition  rate  is  75%  or  lower,  in 
addition to the grounds already provided by the Asylum Procedures Regulation, as well as to 
extend the duration for the examination of an application of international protection under the 
border procedure by an additional eight weeks. It is also proposed to allow Member States to 
derogate  from  the  provisions  on  registering  applications  for  international  protection  with  a 
longer deadline of four weeks. 

Moreover, the proposal provides for the possibility to derogate from certain provisions on the 
border procedure to carry out return as set out in the proposed Asylum Procedures Regulation 
and  in  the  Return  Directive,  in  order  to  facilitate  the  enforcement  of  such  procedures  in 
situations of crisis, when specific adjustments are needed to allow the competent authorities 
under  strain  to  exercise  their  tasks  diligently  and  cope  with  significant  workload.  For  this 
purpose, the proposal extends the maximum duration of the border procedure for carrying out 
return  by  an  additional  period  of  eight  weeks  (the  proposed  Asylum  Procedures  Regulation 
sets the maximum time-limit to twelve weeks) and introduces new specific and well-targeted 

7 

8 

Directive  2008/115/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  16  December  2008  on 
common  standards  and  procedures  in  Member  States  for  returning  illegally  staying  third-country 
nationals, OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98. 
On the basis of the provisional agreement of the EUAA regulation (Article 16). 

EN 

3 

  EN 

 
                                                 
cases,  additional  to  the  ones  set  in  the  proposal  for  a  recast  Return  Directive,  in  which  the 
existence  of  a  risk  of  absconding  in  individual  cases  can  be  presumed,  unless  proven 
otherwise. The return crisis management procedure is without prejudice to the possibility for 
Member States to derogate from the application of the Return Directive by virtue of Article 
2(2)(a)  of  that  same  Directive,  in  relation  to  illegally  staying  third-country  nationals 
apprehended  in  connection  with  the  irregular  crossing  by  land,  sea  or  air  of  the  external 
border  of  a  Member  State  and  who,  following  the  screening  carried  out  in  accordance  with 
Regulation  (EU) No XXX/XXX [Screening  Regulation], have not  subsequently obtained  an 
authorisation  or  right  to  stay  in  that  Member  State  (e.g.  did  not  apply  for  international 
protection). 

To enable Member States and the Union to deal effectively with situations of force majeure, 
as in the situation experienced due to the COVID-19 pandemic declared by the World Health 
Organisation on 11 March 2020, the proposed Regulation also provides for the possibility for 
a  Member  State  to  extend  the  time  limits  set  out  in  the  proposed  Asylum  Procedures 
Regulation  for the registration of applications for international  protection, and to  extend the 
time limits for sending and replying to take charge requests and take back notifications and to 
carry out the transfer to the Member State responsible set out in the proposed Regulation on 
Asylum  and  Migration  Management.  This  proposal  also  provides  for  an  extension  of  the 
timeframe for the implementation of the obligation to relocate or undertake return sponsorship 
when a Member State is in a situation of force majeure which renders it impossible to fulfil 
these obligations as set out in this Regulation and in the Regulation on Asylum and Migration 
Management. 

1.2. 

Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area  

This proposal is fully consistent with the communication on the New Pact on Migration and 
Asylum  and  the  Roadmap  of  initiatives  accompanying  it,  including  the  proposal  for  a 
Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management, the proposal for a Regulation establishing 
a Screening and the proposed Asylum Procedures Regulation. 

This  proposal  complements  the  proposal  for  a  Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration 
Management  insofar  as  it  provides  for  specific  rules  for  the  application  of  the  compulsory 
solidarity mechanism to cover the exceptional situation of a crisis. 

This  proposal  is  also  consistent  with  both  the  proposed  Asylum  Procedures  Regulation  and 
the  proposal  to  recast  the  Return  Directive,  in  particular  by  providing  derogatory  rules 
applicable  in  the  exceptional  situation  of  crisis  as  regards  the  scope  of  application  of  the 
border  procedure,  the  duration  for  the  examination  of  an  application  for  international 
protection  under  this  procedure,  the  deadlines  for  the  registration  of  applications  for 
international protection as well as the scope and time frame of the border procedure to carry 
out return. 

In  addition,  this  proposal  is  fully  consistent  with  and  serves  to  complement  the  EU 
mechanism  for  Preparedness  and  Management  of  Crises  related  to  Migration  (Migration 
Preparedness and Crisis Blueprint) that provides for an operational framework for monitoring 
and  anticipation  of  migration  flows  and  migration  situations,  building  resilience  as  well  as 
organising a coordinated response to a migration crisis. Notably, the proposal makes full use 
of the reports issued and the activities of the network set-up under the Blueprint. 

EN 

4 

  EN 

 
Finally, consistency is also ensured with the provisional political agreements already reached 
on  the  Qualification  Regulation,  the  Reception  Conditions  Directive,  the  EU  Resettlement 
Framework Regulation and the EU Agency for Asylum Regulation. 

1.3. 

Interactions with Article 78(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European 
Union  

The present proposal establishes specific rules to ensure a wider scope and a faster procedure 
than that foreseen in the proposed Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management in order 
to ensure that an effective and efficient system is permanently in place to deal with a situation 
of crisis. 

The establishment of specific rules for solidarity in a situation of crisis is without prejudice to 
the  possibility  for  the  Council  to  adopt,  on  a  proposal  from  the  Commission,  provisional 
measures  for  the  benefit  of  a  Member  State  confronted  by  an  emergency  situation  as 
characterised by Article 78(3) TFEU. 

1.4. 

Consistency with other Union policies 

This proposal is consistent with the comprehensive approach to migration management set out 
in the New Pact on Migration and Asylum, involving putting migration policy at the heart of 
relations with third country partners; creating effective legal pathways to the EU; integrating 
the external border into the EU’s migration management; building seamless fair and efficient 
procedures  on  asylum  and  return;  providing  for  a  Schengen  system  able  to  command 
confidence;  and  developing  dedicated  policies  to  help  the  integration  of  third-country 
nationals into European societies. 

The proposal implements the New Pact and in particular the objective to relaunch the asylum 
reform proposed by the Commission in 2016 by  inter alia looking at ways to put in place a 
seamless  asylum  and  return  system  and  setting  out  a  comprehensive  approach  to  migration 
management. In this respect, this proposal ensures that all Member States make contributions 
to support countries in a situation of crisis. This proposal will ensure that the challenges that 
the  comprehensive  approach  is  facing,  such  as  the  need  to  sustain  a  reduced  pressure  from 
irregular  arrivals  and  strong  external  borders,  reduced  onward  movements  and  stress  on  the 
Schengen  area  as  well  as  a  swift  and  effective  return  and  readmission  are  effectively 
addressed in a situation of crisis. 

2. 

LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY 

2.1. 

Legal basis 

This proposal contributes to the comprehensive approach to migration management and to the 
legislative  proposals  made  together  with  the  Pact  on  Migration  and  Asylum.  It  contains  a 
number of provisions related to the proposed Asylum Procedures Regulation and the proposed 
Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration  Management,  as  well  as  provisions  on  granting  of 
immediate  protection  status  in  situations  of  crisis.  It  should  therefore  be  adopted  on  the 
appropriate  legal  basis,  namely  Article  78,  second  paragraph,  points  (c),  (d)  and  (e)  and 
Article  79,  second  paragraph,  point  (c)  TFEU,  in  accordance  with  the  ordinary  legislative 
procedure. 

2.2. 

Variable geometry 

Ireland  is  bound  by  Regulation  (EU)  No  604/2013,  following  the  notification  of  its  wish to 
take  part  in  the  adoption  and  application  of  that  Regulation  based  on  the  Protocol  on  the 

EN 

5 

  EN 

 
position  of  the  United  Kingdom  and  Ireland  in  respect  of  the  area  of  freedom,  security  and 
justice annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU9. 

In  accordance  with  the  above-mentioned  Protocol,  Ireland  may  decide  to  take  part  in  the 
adoption of this proposal. It also has this option after adoption of the proposal. 

Under the Protocol on the position of Denmark, annexed to the TEU and the TFEU, Denmark 
does not take part in the adoption by the Council of the measures pursuant to Title V of the 
TFEU (with the exception of "measures determining the third countries whose nationals must 
be  in  possession  of  a  visa  when  crossing  the  external  borders  of  the  Member  States,  or 
measures relating to a uniform format for visas"). However, given that Denmark applies the 
current Dublin Regulation, on the basis of an international agreement that it concluded with 
the  EC  in  200610,  it  shall,  in  accordance  with  Article  3  of  that  Agreement,  notify  the 
Commission of its decision whether or not to implement Article 8 of this Regulation. 

The participation of Ireland and Denmark in the arrangements laid down in this proposal for a 
Regulation  will  be  determined  in  the  course  of  negotiations  in  accordance  with  these 
Protocols. These Protocols notably allow Ireland, but do not require it, to opt into initiatives in 
the policy area of freedom, security and justice while respecting their operability. 

2.3. 

Impact of the proposal on non EU Member States  

In  parallel  to  the  association  of  several  non-EU  Member  States  to  the  Schengen  acquis,  the 
Union  has  concluded  several  agreements  associating 
the 
Dublin/Eurodac acquis:  

these  countries  also 

to 

– the agreement associating Iceland and Norway, concluded in 2001; 
– the agreement associating Switzerland, concluded on 28 February 2008; 
– the protocol associating Liechtenstein, concluded on 7 March 2011. 

In  order  to  create  rights  and  obligations  between  Denmark  –  which  as  explained  above  has 
been  associated  to  the  Dublin/Eurodac  acquis  via  an  international  agreement  –  and  the 
associated  countries  mentioned  above,  two  other  instruments  have  been  concluded  between 
the Union and the associated countries11. 

In accordance with the three above-cited agreements, the associated countries shall accept the 
Dublin/Eurodac acquis  and its development  without exception. They do  not  take part in  the 
adoption  of  any  acts  amending  or  building  upon  the  Dublin  acquis  (including  therefore  this 
proposal)  but  have  to  notify  to  the  Commission  within  a  given  time-frame  of  their  decision 
whether or not  to  accept the content of that act,  once approved by the European Parliament 
and the Council. In case Norway, Iceland, Switzerland or Liechtenstein  do not accept an act 
amending  or  building  upon  the  Dublin/Eurodac  acquis,  the  respective  agreements  will  be 

9 
10 

11 

The same applies to the United Kingdom during the transition period under the Withdrawal Agreement.  
Agreement  between  the  European  Community  and  the  Kingdom  of  Denmark  on  the  criteria  and 
mechanisms  for  establishing  the  State  responsible  for  examining  a  request  for  asylum  lodged  in 
Denmark  or  any  other  Member  State  of  the  European  Union  and  "Eurodac"  for  the  comparison  of 
fingerprints for the effective application of the Dublin Convention, OJ L66, 8.3.2006, p. 38. 
Protocol  between  the  European  Community,  the  Swiss  Confederation  and  the  Principality  of 
Liechtenstein  to  the  Agreement  between  the  European  Community  and  the  Swiss  Confederation 
concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request 
for  asylum  lodged  in  a  Member  State  or  in  Switzerland  (concluded  on  24.10.2008,  OJ  L  161, 
24.06.2009, p. 8) and Protocol to the Agreement between the Community, Republic of Iceland and the 
Kingdom of Norway concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for 
examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State, Iceland and Norway (OJ L 93, 3.4.2001). 

EN 

6 

  EN 

 
                                                 
terminated,  unless  the  Joint/Mixed  Committee  established  by  the  agreements  decides 
otherwise, by unanimity. 

The  proposed  Regulation  has  a  wider  scope  beyond  the  subject  matter  of  the  above-cited 
agreements.  In  order  to  ensure  that  the  agreements  with  Denmark  and  the  Associated 
Countries  regulating  their  participation  in  the  Dublin  system  are  preserved,  Denmark, 
Norway,  Iceland,  Switzerland  and  Liechtenstein  will,  should  this  act  be  accepted,  only  be 
bound by Article 8 of this Regulation. 

2.4. 

Subsidiarity 

Title V of the TFEU on the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice confers certain powers on 
these  matters  to  the  European  Union.  These  powers  must  be  exercised  in  accordance  with 
Article  5  of  the  Treaty  on  the  European  Union,  i.e.  if  and  in  so  far  as  the  objectives  of  the 
proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can, therefore, by 
reason  of  the  scale  or  effects  of  the  proposed  action,  be  better  achieved  by  the  European 
Union. 

The proposal introduces specific rules on the application of the solidarity mechanism set out 
in the Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management with a view to structurally deal with 
crisis situations generated in any Member State by a mass influx of persons and achieve a fair 
sharing  of  responsibilities  between  Member  States.  By  definition,  this  proposal  deals  with 
cases where a Member State cannot alone cope with the situation. 

In  addition,  a  number  of  procedural  elements  are  provided  for  to  assist  a  Member  State  or 
Member States facing such situations of crisis. The asylum and return procedures should be 
governed  by  the  same  rules  across  the  Union,  regardless  of  the  number  of  Member  States 
applying them, to ensure, in a situation of crisis, a common approach to the rules that may be 
derogated from. This also provides clarity and legal certainty to the individuals concerned by 
those  procedures  and  ensures  the  respect  of  their  rights.  Furthermore,  the  trigger  for  such 
derogations, as well as their scope and time frame must be regulated at EU level, in order to 
ensure  predictability  and  rule  of  law.  Therefore,  the  objectives  of  this  proposal  cannot  be 
sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can, by reason of the scale and effects of this 
proposed  Regulation,  be  better  achieved  at  Union  level.  The  Union  must  therefore  act  and 
may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5(3) 
of the Treaty on European Union. 

The  proposal  also  contains  measures  relating  to  force  majeure  which  can  be  applied  by  a 
Member States or by the Union as a whole with respect to time limits set out in the proposed 
Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration  Management  or  the  proposed  Asylum  Procedures 
Regulation. 

Achievement of these objectives requires action at the EU level since they are cross-border by 
nature. It is clear that actions taken by individual Member States cannot satisfactorily reply to 
the need for a common EU approach to a common problem. 

2.5. 

Proportionality 

In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in Article 5(4) of the Treaty on 
the European Union, this Regulation sets out the exact conditions when derogatory rules can 
be  applied  as  well  as  provide  for  the  scope  and  time  limit  of  applying  such  rules.  A 
mechanism to govern the application of these derogatory rules is also set up to ensure that it 
does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve its objectives. 

All  the elements  of the  mechanism  to  deal  with  the specific situations of crisis  caused by  a 
mass influx of third country nationals onto the territory of a Member State or with the specific 

EN 

7 

  EN 

 
situation of force majeure are limited to what is necessary to set up and enable the appropriate 
procedural derogations and a rapid triggering of solidarity, to ensure equality of treatment in 
terms  of  rights  and  guarantees  for  applicants  and  to  adapt  the  rules  on  asylum  and  return 
procedures. 

The  derogations  from  the  proposed  Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration  Management  and 
the proposed Asylum Procedures Regulation are proportionate, with a number of safeguards 
put in place that strike a balance between the immediate needs of Member States to manage 
situations of crisis or of force majeure and the need for legal certainty and uniformity in the 
application of such derogations. 

In  view  of  the  extraordinary  situations  of  mass  influx  of  third-country  nationals  or  stateless 
persons arriving irregularly in a Member State which renders its asylum, reception or return 
system  non-functional,  it  is  considered  proportionate  that  in  the  asylum  and  return  crisis 
management  procedure,  the  maximum  durations  of  the  border  procedure  for  asylum  and 
return set  out  in  the Asylum Procedures Regulation  are prolonged by a  maximum period of 
eight weeks respectively. 

The  extension  of  time  limits  introduced  in  cases  of  force  majeure  is  necessary  in  order  to 
streamline  across  the  Union  the  derogations  from  the  proposed  Regulation  on  Asylum  and 
Migration Management and the proposed Asylum Procedures Regulation. 

The limits imposed as to the duration of the application of the derogations allow for striking a 
balance between the need for national authorities facing a situation of force majeure to have 
more time to  carry out  their tasks  and the need to protect  the rights  of applicants  and third-
country nationals or stateless persons whose application for international protection has been 
rejected. 

2.6. 

Choice of the instrument 

Given  that  this  proposed  Regulation  provides  for  certain  derogations  to  the  proposed 
Regulation  on Asylum and Migration Management  and to  the proposed  Asylum Procedures 
Regulation, the same legal instrument is used for putting in place a set of rules to enable the 
Member States and the Union to deal with the specific situations of crisis caused by a mass 
influx  of  third  country  nationals  onto  the  territory  of  a  Member  State  or  to  deal  with  the 
specific situation of force majeure. 

It is only a Regulation establishing derogations from the asylum and return procedures in the 
Union,  and  whose  provisions  shall  be  directly  applicable,  that  can  provide  the  necessary 
degree  of  uniformity  and  effectiveness  needed  in  the  application  of  EU  procedural  rules  on 
asylum in a situation of crisis and force majeure. 

3. 

RESULTS 
CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 

EX-POST 

EVALUATIONS, 

OF 

STAKEHOLDER 

Collection of knowledge of implementation and application of existing legislation 

3.1. 

Evidence-based policy-making 

A detailed analytical Staff Working Document accompanies the legislative proposals which is 
based on publicly available EU data and statistics, as well as on the experience gathered by 
the Commission and its agencies about the asylum and migration situation on the ground. A 
compilation  of  these  showcases  that  the  Common  European  Asylum  System  needs  an 
enhanced legal framework with new or amended rules in order to meet the current migration 
challenges. 

EN 

8 

  EN 

 
The  Staff  Working  Document  identifies  a  number  of  challenges  that  the  EU  is  currently 
facing,  takes  stock  of  the  current  situation,  and  describes  the  possible  solutions  to  address 
them.  It  relies  on  data  collected  from  the  start  of  the  2015-2016  migration  crisis  and  draws 
important  lessons  from  them.  Comparisons  run  throughout  the  paper  in  order  to  showcase 
trends, but also the gaps that have arisen in the management of that crisis. It underlines that in 
certain areas, more robust tools are necessary to fend off any future crises, such as situations 
of  mass  influx,  but  also  flexibility  in  situations  of  force  majeure,  in  light  of  the  lessons 
learned from the COVID-19 pandemic. 

One  of  the  challenges  identified  is  the  lack  of  a  mechanism  to  address  situations  of  crisis 
which could  result from a mass influx of irregular migrants capable of rendering a Member 
State’s  asylum  or  reception  system  non-functional,  and  have  serious  consequences  on  the 
functioning of the overall CEAS. As part of that challenge, it has been identified that, in such 
situations, the EU is still often incapable to ensure access to procedures at the borders, despite 
the fact that the EU is currently better prepared to address crisis situations than it was in 2015. 

Recent  events  such  as  the  COVID-19  pandemic  and  the  political  crisis  witnessed  at  the 
Greek-Turkish border in March 2020 further point to areas where resilience is needed through 
specific rules that can be applied in situations of force majeure. 

Even the best-prepared and well-managed system needs to have a framework within which to 
deal  with  crises  or  situations  of  force  majeure  where  the  flexibility  under  the  various 
legislative instruments is insufficient. Member States need tools to deal with the various and 
different causes of migration as well as immediate measures to deal with the extreme pressure 
stemming from such situations. 

In  addition,  in  crisis  situations,  the  effectiveness  of  response  can  be  heavily  influenced  by 
effective  foresight  and  preparation,  moving  from  a  reactive  mode  to  one  based  on 
preparedness and anticipation. This is something that is still missing at EU level, and that is 
necessary as part of effort to make the current migration management system more resilient 
and responsive. 

The implementation of the Commission Recommendation No XXX on an EU mechanism for 
Preparedness  and  Management  of  Crises  related  to  Migration  (Migration  Preparedness  and 
Crisis Blueprint) should help address this gap by monitoring and anticipating migration flows, 
increase  resilience  and  improve  technical  coordination  of  the  response  to  the  crisis,  in  full 
respect of the legislation in force and while using and complementing the existing tools. 

These  challenges  highlight  the  need  for  specific  rules  on  crisis  solidarity,  which  would 
include a compulsory solidarity scheme for relocation or return sponsorship to ensure a quick 
response to release the extreme pressure faced by affected Member States. They also call for 
procedural derogations that Member States can apply in their asylum and migration systems. 
Derogations  from  the  asylum  and  return  rules  should  ensure  that  Member  States  have  the 
means and sufficient time to carry out relevant procedures in those fields. 

As  regards  displaced  persons  from  third  countries  who  are  facing  a  high  degree  of  risk  of 
being subject to indiscriminate violence, in exceptional situations of armed conflict, and who 
are  unable  to  return  to  their  country  of  origin  and  are  in  need  of  a  quick  form  protection 
arriving to the EU, the Staff Working Document also reaches the conclusion that the existing 

EN 

9 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
measures  to  grant  quick  access  to  protection do  not  seem  to  be fit for purpose any  more.  It 
highlights  that,  according  to  the  Study12  on  the  Temporary  Protection  Directive13  (TPD), 
stakeholders agreed that it has been hardly possible to attain Member State agreement on the 
possible  activation  of  the  TPD.  The  Staff  Working  Document  therefore  concludes  that  the 
Temporary  Protection  Directive  no  longer  responds  to  Member  States’  current  reality  and 
needs to be repealed. It nevertheless recognises that certain groups of third country nationals 
at  high risk must be granted protection on a quick  –  immediate – basis. In that respect,  this 
proposal  ensures  that  the  persons  who  are  granted  immediate  protection  benefit  from 
equivalent  economic  and  social  rights  that  subsidiary  protection  beneficiaries  enjoy  under 
Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Qualification  Regulation].  These  rights  include  the  protection 
from  refoulement,  information  on  the  rights  and  obligations  relating  to  their  status, 
maintaining  family  unity,  the  right  to  be  issued  a  residence  permit,  freedom  of  movement 
within the Member State, access to employment, access to education, access to procedures for 
recognition  of  qualifications  and  validation  of  skills,  social  security  and  social  assistance, 
healthcare,  rights  related  to  unaccompanied  minors,  access  to  accommodation,  access  to 
integration measures and repatriation assistance. 

3.2. 

Stakeholder consultations 

The Commission consulted the European Parliament, the Member States and stakeholders on 
a  number  of  occasions  to  gather  their  views  on  the  new  Pact  on  Migration  and  Asylum.  In 
parallel,  the  Romanian,  Finnish  and  Croatian  Presidencies  have  held  both  strategic  and 
technical  exchanges  on  the  future  of  various  aspects  of  migration  policy,  including  asylum, 
return,  relations  with  third  countries  on  readmission  and  reintegration.  These  consultations 
showed support for a fresh start on European asylum and migration policy to urgently address 
the  flaws  in  the  CEAS,  to  improve  the  effectiveness  of  returns  and  establish  a  genuine 
European return system, to reinforce our relations with third countries on readmission and to 
ensure a sustainable reintegration of migrants following their return to the countries of origin. 

Ahead of the launch of the new Pact on Migration and Asylum, the Commission has engaged 
in continuous intense consultations with the European Parliament. The Commisision has also 
held two rounds of visits and bilateral consultations with each Member State individually in 
the first 100 days in office and also, more recently, before the presentation of the Pact. The 
aim  of  the  consultations  was  to  gather  views  and  ideas  on  the  future  European  Pact  on 
Migration and Asylum. Member States engaged actively in these consultations, with common 
ground emerging on the need for unity, for gradual progress in solving the weaknesses of the 
current system, for a new system of fair sharing of responsibility to which all Member States 
can contribute, for strong border protection, and on the importance of the external dimension 
of migration and improved returns. 

In these discussions, several Member States stressed the need to distinguish between regular 
and  crisis  situations  and  expressed  a  preference  for  accommodating  them  in  different 
instruments. 

Member  States  and  the  European  Parliament  supported  the  need  for  progress  in  solving  the 
weaknesses of the current system, the need for a new system of fair sharing of responsibility 
to which all Member States can contribute, strong border protection, respect for fundamental 

12 
13 

Carried out for DG HOME by ICF, January 2016. 
Council Directive 2001/55/EC of 20 July 2001 on minimum standards for giving temporary protection 
in  the  event  of  a  mass  influx  of  displaced  persons  and  on  measures  promoting  a  balance  of  efforts 
between  Member  States  in  receiving  such  persons  and  bearing  the  consequences  thereof,  OJ  L  212, 
7.8.2001, p. 12. 

EN 

10 

  EN 

 
                                                 
rights  in  all  aspects  of  the  EU’s  migration  policy,  importance  of  the  external  dimension  of 
migration, including legal and safe pathways, and improved returns. 

A  number  of  workshops  and  discussions  were  organised  during  the  Finnish  Presidency  in 
various Council fora, including the Tampere 2.0 Conference held on 24-25 October 2019 in 
Helsinki  and  the  Salzburg  Forum  held  in  Vienna  on  6-7  November  2019,  where  Member 
States have called for the need to frame derogatory rules in times of crisis. 

Commissioner Johansson held on several occasions targeted consultations with international 
organisations,  civil  society  organisations,  relevant  local  non-governmental  organisations  in 
the  Member  States,  social  and  economic  partners.  In  this  consultation  process,  specific 
recommendations  were  presented  in  relation  to  the  need  for  further  developing  a  common 
approach on child-specific standards in line with the Communication of 2017 on Children in 
Migration14. Civil society has also been consulted in the process of the Consultative Forum set 
up by the European Asylum Support Office (EASO), on topics such as the initial steps in the 
asylum procedure (2019). 

The Commission has also taken into consideration specific recommendations of national and 
local  authorities15,  non-governmental  and  international  organisations,  such  as  UNHCR16, 
IOM17, as well as think-tanks and academia, on how to envisage a fresh start on migration and 
address the current migration challenges whilst safeguarding human rights standards. In their 
view,  a  fresh  start  on  the  reform  should  revise  certain  rules  for  the  determination  of 
responsibility  and  provide  for  a  mechanism  of  solidarity  including  for  persons  disembarked 
further  to  a  SAR  operation.  Non-governmental  organisations  also  advocate  for  a  common 
understanding of responsibility among Member States and called for the revised Dublin rules 
to include a more permanent relocation mechanism18. 

The  Commission  also  took  into  account  the  contributions  and  studies  of  the  European 
Migration Network19, which have been launched at its initiative and which over the last years 
have produced several specialised studies and ad hoc queries. 

Many  Member  States  and  stakeholders  pointed  to  the  need  for  a  well-managed  migration 
system that had as part of its arsenal the principle that in time of crisis caused by a mass influx 
of  persons  onto  the  territory  of  a  Member  State,  relocation  should  be  the  default  solidarity 
measure in order to quickly relieve the pressure from that Member State. In addition, in the 
light  of  the  lessons  learned  from  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  all  Member  States  and 
stakeholders  repeatedly  called  on  the  Commission  to  take  into  account  these  lessons  and 
ensure that the legislative framework was able to deal in future with such situations of  force 
majeure. 

Against this background, the Commission carefully assessed the arguments brought forward 
and concluded that alongside the current legislative proposals, it is necessary to provide for a 

14 

15 

16 

17 
18 

19 

The Initiative for Children in Migration called for a common approach to address the issue of missing 
(unaccompanied  and  separated)  children,  to  establish  effective  mechanisms  to  tackle  the  risks  of 
trafficking, and the adoption of child-specific standards for asylum procedures. 
For example, Berlin Action Plan on a new European Asylum Policy, 25 November 2019, signed by 33 
organisations and municipalities. 
UNHCR Recommendations for the European Commission’s proposed Pact on Migration  and Asylum, 
January 2020. 
IOM Recommendations for the new European Union Pact on Migration and Asylum, February 2020.  
CEPS  Project  Report,  Search  and  rescue,  disembarkation  and  relocation  arrangements  in  the 
Mediterranean. Sailing Away from Responsibility?, June 2019. 
All studies and reports of the European Migration Network are available at: https://ec.europa.eu/home-
affairs/what-we-do/networks/european_migration_network_en. 

EN 

11 

  EN 

 
                                                 
framework that can be activated in times of crises and force majeure in order to immediately 
support  the  Member  State  or  Member  States  confronted  with  such  situations  either  through 
specific  rules  on  the  application  of  the  compulsory  solidarity  mechanism  set  out  in  the 
Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management or through other procedural elements that 
may be necessary for Member States or for the Union as a whole to put in place. 

3.3. 

Fundamental rights 

This  proposal  respects  fundamental  rights  and  observes  the  principles  recognised,  in 
particular,  by  the  Charter  of  Fundamental  Rights  of  the  European  Union,  as  well  as  the 
obligations stemming from international law. 

The framework provided for in this Regulation shall be applied in full respect of fundamental 
rights as enshrined in the Charter, including the right to human dignity (Article 1), prohibition 
of  torture  and  inhuman  or  degrading  treatment  or  punishment  (Article  4),  the  right  to  the 
protection  of  personal  data  (Article  8),  the  right  to  asylum  (Article  18),  the  protection  from 
refoulement (Article 19), non-discrimination (Article 21), equality of rights between men and 
women (Article 23), the rights of the child (Article 24) and the right to an effective remedy 
(Article 47). This proposal fully takes into account the rights of the child and the special needs 
of vulnerable persons. 

The right to liberty and freedom of movement is protected given that, if detention is used in 
the context of the derogatory rules to the asylum and return border procedure, such derogatory 
rules can only be applied in a strictly regulated framework and for a limited time. 

As  regards  the  application  of  the  asylum  and  return  crisis  management  procedures,  the 
guarantees  provided  by  the  Asylum  Procedures  Regulation  and  by  the  Return  Directive 
remain  applicable  to  applicants  and  illegally  staying  third-country  nationals  or  stateless 
persons subject to the border procedure. 

The  rights  of  the  child  are  protected  in  the  proposal  by  excluding  minors  from  the  asylum 
crisis  management  procedure  except  in  very  limited  circumstances,  namely  in  cases  where 
they  would  represent  a  danger  to  the  national  security  or  public  order  of  the  Member  State 
concerned. 

The principle of non-refoulement enshrined in Article 33 of the 1951 Refugee Convention and 
Article  19  of  the  Charter  of  Fundamental  Rights  of  the  European  Union  is  also  respected 
when  the  derogations  from  the  border  return  procedure  to  carry  out  return  and  the  Return 
Directive  are  applied.  The  proposal  explicitly  recalls  the  duty  of  Member  States  to  always 
observe this principle. 

4. 

BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS 

Due to the nature of this proposal linked to a crisis situation, it is not possible to  estimate a 
priory the possible budgetary impact.  It  will be  accommodated  as far as  possible within the 
budget of the existing instruments under the period 2021-2027 in the field of migration and 
Asylum,  and  where  necessary,  using  the  flexibility  mechanisms  provided  within  the  MFF 
2021-2027. Where persons granted immediate protection are also applicants for international 
protection  within  the  meaning  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  Procedures 
Regulation], the financing provisions of contributions for relocation of such persons are those 
found in the Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management]. 

EN 

12 

  EN 

 
 
 
The financial needs are compatible with the current multiannual financial framework and also 
entail  the  use  of  special  instruments  as  defined  in  the  Council  Regulation  (EU,  Euratom) 
No 1311/201320. 

In  terms  of  the  asylum  procedural  aspects,  this  proposal  does  not  impose  any  financial  or 
administrative burden on the Union. On those parts, therefore, it has no impact on the Union 
budget. 

5. 

DETAILED  EXPLANATION  OF  THE  SPECIFIC  PROVISIONS  OF  THE 
PROPOSAL 

Definition of crisis  

The situation of crisis covers exceptional situations of mass influx of third-country nationals 
or  stateless  persons  arriving  irregularly  in  a  Member  State  or  disembarked  on  its  territory 
following search and rescue operations, being of such a scale, in proportion to the population 
and  GDP  of  the  Member  State  concerned,  and  nature,  that  it  renders  the  Member  State’s 
asylum,  reception  or  return  system  non-functional,  or  an  imminent  risk  of  such  exceptional 
situations  of  mass  influx.  Such  situations  are  covered  by  the  proposal  only  if  it  is  
demonstrated  that  they  would  have  serious  consequences  for  the  functioning  the  Common 
European Asylum System or the Common Framework as set out in the proposed Regulation 
on Asylum and Migration Management. 

Specific  rules  on  the  compulsory  application,  in  a  situation  of  crisis,  of  the  solidarity 
mechanism set out in the Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management 

5.1. 

Compulsory solidarity in a situation of crisis 

The  proposal  introduces  specific  rules  on  the  application,  in  situations  of  crisis,  of  the 
solidarity  mechanism  set  out  in  the  proposal  for  a  Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration 
Management,  which  provides  for  compulsory  measures  in  the  form  of  relocation  or  return 
sponsorship. These specific rules provide for a wider scope for compulsory relocation that is 
extended  to  include  all  applicants,  be  they  subject  to  the  border  procedure  or  not,  irregular 
migrants,  and  persons  granted  immediate  protection  under  this  Regulation.  In  addition, 
shortened timeframes for triggering the compulsory solidarity mechanism procedure foreseen 
in  the  Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration  Management  are  established.  The  return 
sponsorship provided for in this proposal differs from the one established in the Regulation on 
Asylum and Migration Management because the obligation to transfer the irregular migrant to 
the territory of the sponsoring Member State will be triggered if the person concerned has not 
returned or has not been removed within four months (instead of eight months foreseen in the 
Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management). 

This proposal confers on the Commission the power to adopt implementing acts in accordance 
with  Article  291  TFEU  in  respect  of  triggering  relocation  of  applicants  for  international 
protection, irregular migrants and persons granted immediate protection under this regulation 
as well as return sponsorship implying the obligation to transfer illegally staying third-country 
nationals subject to return sponsorship who have not returned within the set time limits. 

To trigger the specific rules for solidarity, the Commission must establish that a Member State 
is  confronted  with  a  crisis  situation  due  to  an  exceptional  situation  of  mass  influx  of  third 
country nationals or stateless persons arriving irregularly, being of such a scale and nature that 

20 

Council  Regulation  (EU,  Euratom)  No  1311/2013  of  2  December  2013  laying  down  the  multiannual 
financial framework for the years 2014-2020, OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884. 

EN 

13 

  EN 

 
                                                 
it renders the Member State’s asylum, reception or return system non-funcational and which 
can have serious consequences for the functioning of the Common European Asylum System 
or the Common Framework as set out in the proposed Regulation on Asylum and Migration 
Management, or an imminent risk of such a situation.  

The  Commission  shall  assess  the  reasoned  request  by  a  Member  State  requesting  the 
application  of  the  specific  rules  for  compulsory  solidarity  and  determine  whether  there  is  a 
situation  of  crisis  on  the  basis  of  substantiated  information,  in  particular  the  information 
gathered  by  the  Commission  pursuant  to  the  EU  mechanism  for  Preparedness  and 
Management of Crises related to Migration (Migration Preparedness and Crisis Blueprint, by 
EASO  pursuant  to  Regulation  (EU)  No  439/2010,  the  European  Border  and  Coast  Guard 
Agency  pursuant  to  Regulation  (EU)  2019/1896  and  the  Migration  Management  report 
referred to in the proposed Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management. 

Where  a  Member  State  is  itself  a  Member  State  under  pressure  and  is  benefitting  from 
solidarity  support  measures,  including  when  it  is  benefitting  from  such  measures  under  the 
Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management, it shall be excluded from the obligation to 
contribute to relocation or to do return sponsorship under this Regulation. 

The Commission shall convene a Crisis Solidarity Forum in order to discuss the findings of its 
assessment and to define the solidarity response before adopting an implementing act. 

5.2. 

Scope  of  compulsory  solidarity  measures  and    specific  rules  regarding  the 
application of the solidarity mechansim in situations of crisis 

With respect to relocation, the scope of this proposal is widened as compared to that provided 
for in the situations of pressure in the Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management, as it 
will  also  apply  to  applicants  for  international  protection  in  the  border  procedure,  irregular 
migrants  and  persons  granted  immediate  protection  under  this  Regulation.  Transfer  of 
illegally  staying  third-country  nationals  or  stateless  persons  subject  to  return  sponsorship, 
from the Member State in crisis to the sponsoring Member State, would intervene if return has 
not been successfully completed within four months, i.e. following a period shorter than the 
one set in the Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management (eight months).  

The  procedure  for  the  implementation  of  solidarity  measures  under  this  proposal  will  be 
carried  out  within  specific  shortened  timeframes  as  compared  to  those  provided  for  in  the 
Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration  Management.  Therefore,  Member  States  would  be 
required to submit a Crisis Solidarity Response Plan within one week from the finalisation of 
the  assessment  on  the  existence  of  a  situation  of  crisis  in  the  Member  State  concerned  and 
after  the  convening  of  the  Solidarity  Forum  by  the  Commission.  Following  this,  the 
Commission  shall  adopt  the  implementing  act  setting  out  the  solidarity  measures  for  each 
Member State within one week. 

The implementing act shall determine the number of persons to be relocated and/or subject to 
return sponsorship from the Member State in a crisis situation, determine the distribution of 
those  persons  between  Member  States  on  the  basis  of  a  distribution  key  based  on  50% 
population  and  50%  GDP  as  defined  in  the  proposed  Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration 
Management. 

Unlike  the  solidarity  provisions  of  the  proposed  Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration 
Management,  this  proposal  does  not  include  solidarity  measures  in  the  field  of  capacity 
building, operational support and cooperation with third countries, since such measures which 
are of a longer-term nature, are more adapted to situations of pressure. Since in times of crisis 
there  is  a  need  to  quickly  alleviate  the  situation caused  by  the  presence  of  a  mass  influx  of 
persons, this proposed Regulation should focus on these aspects of solidarity. In addition, any 

EN 

14 

  EN 

 
needs  that  arise  in  the  field  of  capacity  building,  operational  support  and  cooperation  with 
third countries would be covered under the EU mechanism for Preparedness and Management 
of  Crises  related  to  Migration  (Migration  Preparedness  and  Crisis  Blueprint  and  the  Union 
Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM). 

The  implementing  act  shall  be  adopted  according  to  Article  8  of  Regulation  (EU)  No 
182/2011 in conjunction with Article 5 thereof, whereby on duly justified imperative grounds 
of  urgency  due  to  the  situation  of  crisis  present  in  a  benefitting  Member  States,  the 
Commission is empowered to adopt immediately applicable implementing acts which remain 
in force for a period not exceeding one year. 

5.3. 

Asylum and return procedures in a situation of crisis 

Criteria and procedural provisions: Article 3 sets out the procedural steps for applying the 
derogatory rules laid down in subsequent Articles 4, 5 and 6. Member States have to submit a 
reasoned  request  to  the  Commission  where  they  consider  themselves  to  be  in  a  situation  of 
crisis and deem necessary the application of either an asylum crisis management procedure, or 
a  return  crisis  management  procedure,  or  need  to  apply  derogations  from  the  provisions  on 
registering applications for international protection. The screening of third-country nationals 
according to the rules laid down in the Screening Regulation should apply with the possibility 
to  extend  the  five-day  deadline  by  another  five  days,  as  specified  in  that  Regulation.  The 
derogations may be requested individually or cumulatively, however the conditions specified 
for  the  application  of  each  Article  need  to  be  met  individually.  Upon  the  request  of  one  or 
several  Member States concerned, the Commission, by means of an implementing decision, 
which can apply to one or more Member States, authorises the application of the derogatory 
rules,  for  a  period  to  be  determined  by  the  decision  itself.  In  view  of  the  possible  need  for 
immediate action, Member States may start to unilaterally apply the provision concerning the 
extension  of  the  registration  deadline  for  a  maximum  of  fifteen  days,  upon  which  the 
Commission can either authorise its further application or decide not to do so. The application 
of the derogatory rules has a clear timeframe for all cases: six months, which can be extended 
to maximum one year for the provisions on the asylum crisis management procedure and the 
return  crisis  management  procedure,  and  maximum  four  weeks  for  the  application  of 
derogation from registering applicants for international protection. This period of four weeks 
is renewable, upon a further request by the Member State concerned, but should not, in any 
case, exceed twelve weeks in total.  

Asylum crisis management procedure: Article 4 lays down a possibility for Member States 
to  derogate  from  the  asylum  border  procedure  under  Article  41  of  the  proposed  Asylum 
Procedures Regulation, by taking decisions in the context of a border procedure on the merits 
of an application where the applicant is of a nationality with below an EU-wide recognition 
rate  of  75%  or  lower,  in  addition  to  the  cases  listed  under  Article  41  of  the  Asylum 
Procedures  Regulation.  The  recognition  rate  threshold  of  75%  or  lower  is  intended  to 
constitute a basis for Member States to  rapidly channel  third-country nationals  and stateless 
persons  into  a  regular  asylum  procedure  at  the  border,  while  not  prejuding  the  outcome  of 
their  asylum  application.  This  is  different  from  the  20%  recognition  rate  threshold  in  the 
Asylum  Procedures  Regulation,  which  constitutes  an  acceleration  ground.  Accordingly, 

EN 

15 

  EN 

 
 
 
Member States have to continue to apply the border procedure to all those cases provided by 
the  Asylum  Procedures  Regulation  (security  threat,  applicants  coming  from  a  country  with 
less than 20% of the EU average recognition rate) but can apply the border procedure to all 
other applicants coming from a country with an EU-wide recognition rate of 75% or lower. In 
addition, in a situation of crisis, the border procedure may be applied by Member States for an 
additional  period  of  eight  weeks,  extending  the  period  of  twelve  weeks  provided  for  by  the 
Asylum Procedures Regulation. 

Return crisis management procedure: Article 5 lays down a possibility for Member States 
to derogate from certain provisions of the border procedure for carrying out return established 
by Article 41a of proposed Asylum Procedures Regulation and of the Return Directive. Such 
derogations would apply to third-country nationals or stateless persons whose application was 
rejected in the context of the asylum crisis management procedure, as well as to those subject 
to the border procedure of Article 41 of the proposed Asylum Procedures Regulation whose 
application is rejected before the adoption by the Commission of a decision declaring that the 
Member  State  concerned  is  confronted  with  a  situation  of  crisis,  and  who  have  no  right  to 
remain  and  are  not  allowed  to  remain  after  the  adoption  of  that  decision.  The  derogatory 
provisions  extend  the  maximum  duration  of  the  border  procedure  for  carrying  out  return, 
including detention where necessary as a last resort, by an additional period of 8 weeks and 
introduces new specific and well-targeted cases, additional to the ones set in the proposal for a 
recast Return Directive, in which the existence of a risk of absconding in individual cases can 
be presumed, unless proven otherwise.  

Derogations from the provision on registering applications for international protection: 
Article  6  provides  for  the  possibility  for  Member  States  to  delay  the  registration  of 
applications  for  international  protection  up  to  four  weeks,  by  derogation  from  Article  27  of 
the proposed Asylum Procedures Regulation.  

5.4. 

Extension of time limits 

Registration  of  applications  for  international  protection:  In  situations  of  force  majeure, 
where  it  is  impossible  for  a  Member  State  to  apply  the  registration  deadline,  Article  7 
provides for a four-week extension for Member States to register applications for international 
protection,  by  derogation  from  Article  27  of  the  proposed  Asylum  Procedures  Regulation. 
Member  States  facing  such  situation  of  force  majeure  must  inform  the  Commission  of  that 
situation and indicate precise reasons for the application of the derogation. The Member State 
concerned shall likewise inform the Commission of the termination of the situation of  force 
majeure, upon which the extended time limit for registrations should no longer be applied.  

Time limits in Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management]: In 
situations of force majeure, where it is impossible for a Member State to apply the procedure 
for sending and replying to take charge requests and take back notifications within the time 
limits  set  out  in  the  proposed  Regulation  on  Asylum  and  Migration  Management,  or  to 
comply with the time limit to transfer an applicant to the Member State responsible, specific 

EN 

16 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
derogations are set out to allow Member States to extend the relevant time limits under strict 
conditions.  Member  States  facing  such  situations  of  force  majeure  must  inform  the 
Commission  of  that  situation  and  indicate  precise  reasons  for  the  application  of  the 
derogation.  The  Member  State  concerned  shall  likewise  inform  the  Commission  of  the 
termination of the situation of force majeure, after which the extended time limits should no 
longer be applied. 

Extension of timeframe for solidarity obligations set out in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX 
[Asylum  and  Migration  Management]  and  in  this  Regulation:  where  for  reasons  of  a 
situation of force majeure in a particular Member State that Member State is unable to fulfil 
its obligations set out in the solidarity mechanism of the proposed Regulation on Asylum and 
Migration  Management  or  foreseen  in  this  Regulation,  a  Member  State  may  notify  the 
Commission  of  the  situation  and  extend  the  timeframe  for  the  implementation  of  such 
solidarity measures by a maximum of six months. 

Granting  of  immediate  protection:  Article  10  provides  for  the  granting  of  immediate 
protection  status  to  displaced  persons  who,  in  their  country  of  origin,  are  facing  an 
exceptionally  high  risk  of  being  subject  to  indiscriminate  violence,  in  a  situation  of  armed 
conflict, and who are unable to return to that third country. The need to apply this Article and 
the  precise  group  of  people  concerned  is  to  be  determined  by  the  Commission  in  an 
implementing  act.  Member  States  may,  during  the  period  of  application  determined  by  the 
implementing  act,  suspend  the  examination  of  applications  for  international  protection  and 
grant immediate protection to those persons who meet the respective criteria. This suspension 
period can extend to a maximum of one year upon which the resumption of the examination 
of the asylum application needs to take place. This will ensure the required protection for the 
persons  concerned  while  alleviating  the  pressure  on  the  Member  State  to  examine  a  large 
amount of asylum applications all at once.  

Persons  granted  immediate  protection  remain  applicants  for  international  protection  at  the 
same  time,  but  should  enjoy  the  set  of  economic  and  social  rights  that  are  applicable  to 
subsidiary protection beneficiaries as laid down in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Qualification 
Regulation]. The granting of immediate protection does not relieve the Member State of the 
obligation to determine the Member State responsible for examining the application pursuant 
to Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management], but allows the person 
concerned  to  have  the  status  while  the  procedure  pursuant  to  that  Regulation  is  carried  out. 
Where another Member State is determined as the Member State responsible, the immediate 
protection  ceases  when  the  transfer  pursuant  to  that  Regulation  is  carried  out.  Should  the 
persons  concerned  move  on  to  other  Member  States  and  apply  for  international  protection 
there,  the  Member  State  responsible  would  also  be  obliged  to  take  them  back  pursuant  to 
Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management]. Given that this proposal 
includes specific rules for relocation in situations of crisis caused by a mass influx of persons 
onto the territory of a Member State, and the key provisions for such relocation are contained 
in this proposal and the proposal for a Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management, the 
Commission  intends  to  withdraw  its  proposal  of  2015  for  a  Regulation  of  the  European 
Parliament  and  of  the  Council  establishing  a  crisis  relocation  mechanism  and  amending 

EN 

17 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 
establishing  the  criteria  and  mechanisms  for  determining  the  Member  State  responsible  for 
examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a 
third country national or a stateless person21.  

Given the development of the concepts and rules of qualification for international protection, 
and in view of the fact that this Regulation lays down rules for granting immediate protection 
status in crisis situations, the Temporary Protection Directive should be repealed. Under this 
proposal,  immediate  protection  should  be  granted  to  displaced  persons  from  third  countries 
who  are  facing  a  high  degree  of  risk  of  being  subject  to  indiscriminate  violence,  in 
exceptional  situations  of  armed  conflict,  and  who  are  unable  to  return  to  their  country  of 
origin. 

21 

COM(2015) 450 final. 

EN 

18 

  EN 

 
 
                                                 
2020/0277 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

addressing situations of crisis and force majeure in the field of migration and asylum 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  and  in  particular 
Article 78(2)(c), (d) and (e) and Article 79(2)(c) thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, 

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments, 
Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee1,  
Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions2,  

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

The Union, in constituting an area of freedom, security and justice, should ensure the 
absence of internal border controls for persons and frame a common policy on asylum, 
immigration and external border control, based on solidarity between Member States, 
which is fair towards third-country nationals. 

To  this  end,  a  comprehensive  approach  is  required  with  the  objective  of  building 
mutual trust between Member States. 

The  comprehensive  approach  should  bring  together  policies  in  the  areas  of  asylum, 
migration  management,  returns,  external  border  protection  and  partnership  with 
relevant  third  countries,  recognising  that  the  effectiveness  of  the  overall  approach 
depends on all components being jointly addressed and in an integrated manner. The 
comprehensive approach should ensure that the Union has at its disposal specific rules 
to  effectively  manage  migration  including  the  triggering  of  a  compulsory  solidarity 
mechanism  and  that  all  the  necessary  measures  are  put  in  place  to  prevent  crisis  to 
happen. 

(4) 

Notwithstanding the putting in  place of the necessary preventive measures,  it cannot 
be  excluded  that  a  situation  of  crisis  or  force  majeure  in  the  field  of  migration  and 
asylum arises due to  circumstances beyond the control of the Union and its Member 
States. 

(5) 

This  Regulation  should  contribute  to  and  complete  the  comprehensive  approach  by 
setting  out  the  specific  procedures  and  mechanisms  in  the  field  of  international 

1 
2 

OJ C , , p. . 
OJ C , , p. . 

EN 

19 

  EN 

 
                                                 
(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

(10) 

protection and return that should apply in the exceptional circumstances of a situation 
of  crisis.  It  should  ensure,  in  particular,  the  effective  application  of  the  principle  of 
solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility and the adaptation of the relevant rules on 
asylum  and  return  procedures,  so  that  the  Member  States  and  the  Union  have  the 
necessary  tools  at  their  disposal  including  sufficient  time  to  carry  out  those 
procedures. 

A mass influx of persons crossing the border irregularly and within a short period of 
time may lead to a situation of crisis in a particular Member State. That may also have 
consequences for the functioning of the asylum and migration system, not only in that 
Member  State  but  in  the  Union  as  a  whole,  due  to  unauthorised  movements  and  the 
lack  of  capacity  in  the  Member  State  of  first  entry  to  process  the  applications  for 
international  protection  of  such  third-country  nationals.  It  is  necessary  to  lay  down 
specific  rules  and  mechanisms  that  should  enable  effective  action  to  address  such 
situations. 

In  addition  to  situations  of  crisis,  Member  States  may  be  faced  with  abnormal  and 
unforeseeable  circumstances  outside  their  control,  the  consequences  of  which  could 
not have been avoided in spite of the exercise of all due care. Such situations of force 
majeure could  make it impossible to  respect  the time limits  set  by Regulations (EU) 
XXX/XXX  [Asylum  Procedures  Regulation]  and  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  and 
Migration  Management]  for  registering  applications  for  international  protection  or 
carrying  out  the  procedures  for  determining  the  Member  State  responsible  for 
examining  an  application  for  international  protection.  In  order  to  ensure  that  the 
common asylum system  continues functioning in an efficient and  fair manner, while 
guaranteeing  a  timely  examination  of  international  protection  needs  and  legal 
certainty, longer time limits for the registration of applications and for the procedural 
steps  required  for  determining  responsibility  and  transferring  applicants  to  the 
responsible Member State should apply in such situations. Member States faced with a 
situation  of  force  majeure  should  also  be  able  to  implement  the  solidarity  measures 
that they have to take pursuant to the solidarity mechanism set out in this Regulation 
and  in  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  and  Migration  Management]  within  an 
extended time frame, where necessary. 

The solidarity mechanism for situations of migratory pressure as set out in Regulation 
(EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  and  Migration  Management]  should  be  adapted  to  the 
specific needs of situations of crisis by extending the personal scope of the solidarity 
measures provided for in that Regulation and setting shorter deadlines. 

The adoption of measures in respect of a particular Member State should be without 
prejudice to the possibility for the Council to adopt provisional measures on a proposal 
from the Commission pursuant to Article 78(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the 
European  Union  in  the  event  of  an  emergency  situation  in  a  Member  State 
characterised by a sudden inflow of third-country nationals. 

In order to quickly help alleviate the pressure faced by a Member State in a situation 
of  crisis,  the  scope  of  relocation  should  include  all  categories  of  applicants  for 
international  protection,  including  persons  granted  immediate  protection,  as  well  as 
beneficiaries  of  international  protection  and  irregular  migrants.  Furthermore,  a 
Member  State  that  provides  return  sponsorship  should  transfer  the  illegally  staying 
third-country national from the benefitting Member State if the person concerned does 
not return or is not removed within four months, instead of eight months as provided 
for by Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management]. 

EN 

20 

  EN 

 
(11)  The  procedural  rules  set  out  in  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  and  Migration 
Management] for carrying out relocation and return sponsorship should be applied for 
the  purpose  of  ensuring  the  proper  implementation  of  the  solidarity  measures  in  a 
situation of crisis,  although they should be adjusted in order to take into account the 
gravity and urgency of that situation. 

(12) 

(13) 

(14) 

In situations of crisis, Member States might need a wider set of measures in order to 
manage  a  mass  influx  of  third-country  nationals  in  an  orderly  fashion  and  contain 
unauthorised movements. Such measures should include the application of an asylum 
crisis management procedure and a return crisis management procedure. 

In  order  to  allow  Member  States  to  deal  with  large  numbers  of  applications  for 
international  protection  in  situations  of  crisis,  a  longer  time  limit  should  be  set  for 
registering the applications for international protection made during such situations of 
crisis. Such an extension should be without prejudice to the rights of asylum applicants 
guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. 

In order to ensure that Member States have the necessary flexibility when confronted 
with  a  large  influx  of  migrants  expressing  the  intention  to  apply  for  asylum,  the 
application  of  the  border  procedure,  established  by  Article  41  of  Regulation  (EU) 
XXX/XXX  [Asylum  Procedures  Regulation]  should  be  broadened,  and  an  asylum 
crisis  management  procedure  should  allow  Member  States  to  take  a  decision  in  the 
framework of a border procedure also on the merits of an application in cases where 
the applicant is of a nationality, or, in the case of stateless persons, a former habitual 
resident of a third country, for which the proportion of decisions granting international 
protection  Union-wide  is  75%  or  lower.  As  a  result,  in  the  application  of  the  crisis 
border  procedure,  Member  States  should  continue  applying  the  border  procedure  as 
provided  by  Article  41  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  Procedures 
Regulation] but could extend the application of the border procedure to nationals who 
come from third countries where the EU-wide average recognition rate is above 20% 
but under 75%. 

(15)  The  screening  of  third-country  nationals  according  to  the  rules  laid  down  in 
Regulation  (EU)  No  XXX/XXX  [Screening  Regulation]  should  apply  with  the 
possibility  to  extend  the  5-day  deadline  by  another  five  days,  as  specified  in  that 
Regulation. 

(16) 

In a situation of crisis, in view of the possible strain on the asylum system, Member 
States  should  have  the  possibility  not  to  authorise  the  entry  in  their  territory  of 
applicants subject to a border procedure for a longer period of time than the ones set in 
Article  41  (11)  and  (13)  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  Procedures 
Regulation]. However, the procedures should be completed as soon as possible and in 
any  event  the  periods  of  time  should  only  be  prolonged  by  an  additional  period  not 
exceeding eight weeks; if those procedures cannot be completed by the expiry of that 
prolonged period,  applicants  should be authorised to  enter the territory of a Member 
State for the purpose of completing the procedure for international protection. 

(17)  The return  crisis  management procedure should facilitate, in  a situation of crisis,  the 
return of illegally staying third-country nationals whose applications were rejected in 
the context of a crisis asylum management procedure and who have no right to remain 
and  are  not  allowed  to  remain,  by  providing  the  competent  national  authorities  with 
the necessary tools and sufficient  time-frame to carry out return procedures with due 
diligence.  To  be  able  to  respond  to  situations  of  crisis  in  an  effective  manner,  the 
return  crisis  management  procedure  should  apply  also  to  applicants,  third-country 

EN 

21 

  EN 

 
nationals and stateless persons subject to the border procedure referred to in Article 41 
of  the  of  proposed  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  Procedures  Regulation], 
whose  applications  were  rejected  before  the  adoption  of  a  Commission  decision 
declaring that a Member State is confronted with a situation of crisis, and who have no 
right to remain and are not allowed to remain after such a decision. 

(18)  When applying the return crisis management procedure, illegally staying third-country 
nationals  or  stateless  persons  who  have  no  right  to  remain  and  are  not  allowed  to 
remain should not be authorised to enter the territory of the Member State concerned 
and  should  be  kept  at  the  locations  referred  to  in  Article  41a(2)  of  Regulation  (EU) 
XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation] for a period that may be longer than the 
one established by that Article in order to enable authorities to cope with the situations 
of crisis and finalise return procedures; for this purpose, the maximum duration of 12 
weeks  of  the  border  procedure  for  carrying  out  return  set  out  in  Article  41a(2)  of 
Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation] could be prolonged by 
an additional period that may not exceed eight weeks. During that period, it should be 
possible  to  keep  the  illegally  staying  third-country  nationals  in  detention,  in 
application  of  Article  41(a)(5)  and  (6)  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum 
Procedures Regulation], provided that the guarantees and conditions for detention laid 
down  in  Directive  XXX/XXX/EU  [recast  Return  Directive]  are  respected,  including 
the  individual  assessment  of  each  case,  judicial  control  of  detention  and  adequate 
conditions of detention. 

(19) 

In order to allow for the proper management of a crisis situation and ensure a proper 
adaptation of the relevant rules on the asylum and return procedure, the Commission 
should,  by  way  of  an  implementing  decision,  authorise  concerned  Member  States, 
upon their reasoned request, to apply relevant derogatory rules. Such an implementing 
decision could authorise one or more requesting Member States to derogate from the 
relevant rules. 

(20)  The  Commission  should  examine  a  reasoned  request  submitted  by  a  Member  State 
while  taking  into  account  substantiated  information  gathered  pursuant  to  Regulation 
(EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Agency Regulation] and Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council3  and  the  Migration  Management  report 
referred to in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management]. 

(21) 

In  order  to  provide  Member  States  with  additional  time  needed  to  deal  with  the 
situation  of  crisis  and  at  the  same  time  ensure  an  effective  and  as  quick  as  possible 
access  to  the  relevant  procedures  and  rights,  the  Commission  should    authorise  the 
application  of  the  asylum  crisis  management  procedure  and  the  return  crisis 
management procedure  for a period of six months, which could  be  extended up to  a 
period  not  exceeding  one  year.  After  the  expiry  of  the  relevant  period,  the  extended 
deadlines provided for in the asylum and return crisis management procedures should 
not be applied to new applications for international protection. 

(22)  For the same reasons, the Commission should authorise the application of derogatory 
rules as regards the registration deadline for a period not exceeding four weeks, which 
should  be  renewable  upon  a  new  reasoned  request  submitted  by  the  Member  State 

3 

Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2019 on 
the  European  Border  and  Coast  Guard  and  repealing  Regulations  (EU)  No  1052/2013  and  (EU) 
2016/1624, OJ L 295, 14.11.2019, p. 1. 

EN 

22 

  EN 

 
                                                 
 
concerned.  The  total  period  of  application  should  nonetheless  not  exceed  twelve 
weeks. 

(23) 

In  a  crisis  situation,  Member  States  should  have  the  possibility  to  suspend  the 
examination  of  applications  for  international  protection  made  by  displaced  persons 
from  third  countries  who  are  unable  to  return  to  their  country  of  origin,  where  they 
would  face  a  high  degree  of  risk  of  being  subject  to  indiscriminate  violence,  in 
exceptional  situations  of  armed  conflict.  In  such  a  case,  immediate  protection  status 
should be granted to those persons. Member States should resume the examination of 
their application one year at the latest from its suspension. 

(24)  Persons granted immediate protection should continue to be considered as applicants 
for  international  protection,  in  view  of  their  pending  application  for  international 
protection  within  the  meaning  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  Procedures 
Regulation],  as  well  as  within  the  meaning  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum 
and Migration Management]. 

(25)  Member  States  should  ensure  that  beneficiaries  of  immediate  protection  status  have 
effective  access  to  all  the  rights  laid  down  in  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX 
[Qualification Regulation] applicable and equivalent to those enjoyed by beneficiaries 
of subsidiary protection. 

(26) 

In  order  to  carry  out  a  proper  assessment  of  applications  for  international  protection 
submitted  by  beneficiaries  of  immediate  protection,  the  asylum  procedures  should 
resume at the latest after one year from the suspension of such procedures. 

(27)  Since  the  adoption  of  Council  Directive  2001/55/EC4,  the  rules  concerning  the 
qualification  of  beneficiaries  of  international  protection  have  evolved  considerably. 
Given that this Regulation lays down rules for granting immediate protection status in 
crisis situations to displaced persons from third countries who are unable to return to 
their country of origin, and provides for specific rules for solidarity for such persons, 
Directive 2001/55/EC should be repealed. 

(28)  Specific  rules  should  be  set  out  for  situations  of  force  majeure,  to  allow  Member 
States  to  extend  the  time  limits  set  out  in  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  and 
Migration Management] under strict conditions where it is impossible to comply with 
those time limits due to the extraordinary situation. Such extension should apply to the 
time  limits  set  out  for  sending  and  replying  to  take  charge  requests  and  take  back 
notifications  as  well  as  the  time  limit  to  transfer  an  applicant  to  the  Member  State 
responsible. 

(29)  Specific rules should also be set out for situations of force majeure, to allow Member 
States to extend the time limits relating to registration of applications for international 
protection  in  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  Procedures  Regulation],  under 
strict  conditions.  In  these  cases,  applications  for  international  protection  should  be 
registered by that Member State at the latest four weeks from when they are made. 

(30) 

In  such  situations  of  force  majeure,  the  Member  State  concerned  should  notify  the 
Commission and, where applicable, the other Member States, of its intention to apply 
the  respective  derogations  from  those  time  limits,  as  well  as  the  precise  reasons  for 

4 

Council Directive 2001/55/EC of 20 July 2001 on minimum standards for giving temporary protection 
in  the  event  of  a  mass  influx  of  displaced  persons  and  on  measures  promoting  a  balance  of  efforts 
between  Member  States  in  receiving  such  persons  and  bearing  the  consequences  thereof  (OJ  L  212, 
7.8.2001, p. 12.) 

EN 

23 

  EN 

 
                                                 
their  intended  application,  as  well  as  the  period  of  time  during  which  they  will  be 
applied. 

(31) 

In  situations  of  force  majeure,  which  render  it  impossible  for  a  Member  State  to 
comply  with  the  obligation  to  undertake  solidarity  measures  within  the  timeframes 
established in the Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management] 
and  this  Regulation,  it  should  be  possible  for  that  Member  State  to  notify  the 
Commission and the other Member States of the precise reasons for which it considers 
that  it  is  facing  such  a  situation  and  extend  the  timeframe  for  undertaking  solidarity 
measures. 

(32)  Where a Member State is no longer facing a situation of  force majeure, it should, as 
soon  as  possible,  notify  the  Commission,  and  where  applicable,  the  other  Member 
States,  of  the  cessation  of  the  situation.  The  time  limits  derogating  from  Regulation 
(EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management] should not be applied to new 
applications for international protection made or for third-country nationals or stateless 
persons  found  to  be  illegally  staying  after  the  date  of  that  notification.  Upon  such 
notification,  the  time  limits  laid  down  in  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum 
Procedures Regulation] should start to apply. 

(33)  To support Member States who undertake relocation as a solidarity measure, financial 

support from the EU budget should be provided. 

(34) 

In  order  to  ensure  uniform  conditions  for  the  implementation  of  this  Regulation, 
implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should 
be  exercised  in  accordance  with  Regulation  (EU)  No  182/2011  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council5. 

(35)  The examination procedure should be used for the adoption of solidarity measures in 
situations of crisis for authorising the application of derogatory procedural rules, and 
for triggering the granting of immediate protection status. 

(36)  The  Commission  should  adopt  immediately  applicable  implementing  acts  in  duly 
justified  imperative  grounds  of  urgency  due  to  the  situation  of  crisis  present  in 
Member States. 

(37)  This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised 
by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular respect for 
human  dignity,  the  right  to  life,  the  prohibition  of  torture  and  inhuman  or  degrading 
treatment  or  punishment,  the  right  to  asylum  and  the  protection  in  the  event  of 
removal,  expulsion  or  extradition.  The  Regulation  should  be  implemented  in 
compliance  with  the  Charter  and  general  principles  of  Union  law  as  well  as 
international  law,  including  refugee  protection,  human  rights  obligation  and  the 
prohibition of refoulement. 

(38) 

In  accordance  with  Articles  1  and  2  of  Protocol  No  22  on  the  position  of  Denmark 
annexed  to  the  Treaty  on  European  Union  and  to  the  TFEU,  Denmark  is  not  taking 
part  in  the  adoption  of  this  Regulation  and  is  not  bound  by  it  or  subject  to  its 
application. Given that Article 8 of this Regulation constitute amendments within the 
meaning of Article 3 of the Agreement concluded between the European Community 
and  the  Kingdom  of  Denmark  on  the  criteria  and  mechanisms  for  establishing  the 

5 

Regulation  (EU)  No  182/2011  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  16  February  2011 
laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States 
of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers, (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13). 

EN 

24 

  EN 

 
                                                 
State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in Denmark or any other 
Member State of the European Union and ‘Eurodac’ for the comparison of fingerprints 
for  the  effective  application  of  the  Dublin  Convention6,  Denmark  has  to  notify  the 
Commission  of  its  decision  whether  or  not  to  implement  the  content  of  such 
amendments  at  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  amendments  or  within  30  days 
hereafter. 

[In  accordance  with  Article  3  of  Protocol  No  21  on  the  position  of  the  United 
Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed 
to  the  TEU  and  to  the  TFEU,  Ireland  has  notified  their  wish  to  take  part  in  the 
adoption and application of this Regulation] 

[In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United 
Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, annexed 
to  the  TEU  and  to  the  TFEU,  and  without  prejudice  to  Article  4  of  that  Protocol, 
Ireland is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or 
subject to its application.] 

(39) 

OR 

(40) 

(41)  As regards Iceland and Norway, Article 8 of this Regulation constitute new legislation 
in  a  field  which  is  covered  by  the  subject  matter  of  the  Annex  to  the  Agreement 
concluded by the European Community and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom 
of  Norway  concerning  the  criteria  and  mechanisms  for  establishing  the  State 
responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Iceland 
or Norway7. 

(42)  As  regards  Switzerland,  Article  8  of  this  Regulation  constitute  acts  or  measures 
amending or building upon the provisions of Article 1 of the Agreement between the 
European  Community  and  the  Swiss  Confederation  concerning  the  criteria  and 
mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum 
lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland8. 

(43)  As  regards  Liechtenstein,  Article  8  of  this  Regulation  constitute  acts  or  measures 
amending or building upon the provisions of Article 1 of the Agreement between the 
European  Community  and  the  Swiss  Confederation  concerning  the  criteria  and 
mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum 
lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland to which Article 3 of the Protocol between 
the  European  Community, 
the  Principality  of 
Liechtenstein  on  the  accession  of  the  Principality  of  Liechtenstein  to  the  Agreement 
between  the  European  Community  and  the  Swiss  Confederation  concerning  the 
criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request 
for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland9 refers, 

the  Swiss  Confederation  and 

6 
7 
8 
9 

OJ L 66, 8.3.2006, p. 38. 
OJ L 93 , 3.4.2001 p. 40. 
OJ L 53, 27.2.2008, p. 5. 
OJ L 160, 18.6.2011, p. 37. 

EN 

25 

  EN 

 
                                                 
HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

CHAPTER I- GENERAL PROVISIONS  

Article 1 

Subject matter 

1. 

2. 

(a) 

This  Regulation  addresses  situations  of  crisis  and  force  majeure  in  the  field  of 
migration  and  asylum  within  the  Union  and  provides  for  specific  rules  derogating 
from  those  set  out  in  Regulations  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  and  Migration 
Management]  and  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  Procedures  Regulation]  and  in 
Directive XXX [recast Return Directive]. 

For the purposes of this Regulation, a situation of crisis is to be understood as: 

an exceptional situation of mass influx of third-country nationals or stateless persons 
arriving  irregularly  in  a  Member  State  or  disembarked  on  its  territory  following 
search and rescue operations, being of such a scale,  in proportion to the population 
and  GDP  of  the  Member  State  concerned,  and  nature,  that  it  renders  the  Member 
State’s  asylum,  reception  or  return  system  non-functional  and  can  have  serious 
consequences  for  the  functioning  the  Common  European  Asylum  System  or  the 
Common  Framework  as  set  out  in  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  and 
Migration Management], or 

(b) 

an imminent risk of such a situation. 

CHAPTER II – SOLIDARITY MECHANISM 

Article 2 

Solidarity in situations of crisis 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

For  the  purpose  of  providing  solidarity  contributions  for  the  benefit  of  a  Member 
State in situations of crisis as set out in Article 1(2)(a), Part IV of Regulation (EU) 
XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management] shall apply mutatis mutandis, with 
the  exception  of  Article  45(1),  point  (d),  Article  47,  Article  48,  Article  49,  Article 
51(3)(b)(iii)  and  (4),  Article  52(2)  and  (5)  and  Article  53(2),  second  and  third 
subparagraphs. 

By way of derogation from Article 50(3), the assessment referred to in that paragraph 
shall cover the situation in the Member State concerned during the preceding [one] 
month. 

By  way  of  derogation  from  Articles  51(1),  52(3)  and  53(1)  of  Regulation  (EU) 
XXX/XXX  [Asylum  and  Migration  Management],  the  deadlines  set  in  those 
provisions shall be shortened to one week. 

By  way  of  derogation  from  Article  51(2)  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum 
and Migration Management] the report referred to therein shall indicate whether the 
Member State concerned is in a situation of crisis as defined in Article 1(2)(a) of this 
Regulation. 

EN 

26 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
5. 

6. 

7. 

By  way  of  derogation  from  Article  51(3)(b)(ii),   Article  52(1)  and  52(3)  first  sub-
paragraph  and  Article  53(3)(a)  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  and 
Migration  Management],  relocation  shall  include  not  only  persons  referred  to  in 
points (a) and (c) of Article 45(1) of that Regulation, but also persons referred to in 
points (a) and (b) of Article 45(2). 

By way of derogation from Article 54 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and 
Migration Management], the share calculated in accordance with the formula set out 
in that Article shall also apply to measures set out in Article 45(2), points (a) and (b) 
of that Regulation. 

By  way  of  derogation  from  Article  55(2)  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum 
and Migration Management], the deadline set therein shall be set at four months.  

CHAPTER III - ASYLUM AND RETURN PROCEDURES IN A SITUATION OF CRISIS  

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

Article 3 

Criteria and procedural provisions 

Where a Member State  considers that it is  facing a crisis  situation as referred to  in 
Article 1(2), that Member State shall submit a reasoned request to the Commission 
for the purpose of applying the rules laid down in Articles 4, 5 or 6 as necessary.  

Where, on the basis of the examination carried out in accordance with paragraph 8, 
the  Commission  considers  such  a  request  justified,  it  shall,  by  means  of  an 
implementing  decision,  authorise  the  Member  State  concerned  to  apply  the 
derogatory rules laid down in Articles 4, 5 or 6. 

The  implementing  decision  referred  to  in  paragraph  2  shall  be  adopted  within  ten 
days  from  the  request  and  shall  set  the  date  from  which  the  rules  laid  down  in 
Articles 4, 5 or 6 may be applied, as well as the time period for their application.  

The Commission may authorise the application of the rules laid down in Articles 4 
and 5 for six  months. That  period may be extended for a period not  exceeding one 
year. 

The Commission may authorise the application of the rules laid down in Article 6 for 
a maximum period of four weeks. If a Member State considers it necessary to further 
extend the application of the rules laid down in Article 6, it shall submit a reasoned 
request to the Commission at the latest five days before the expiry of the four-week 
period.  The  Commission  may  authorise  the  prolongation  of  the  application  of  the 
rules laid down in Article 6 for an additional maximum period of four weeks, which 
shall be renewable once. The period of application shall not exceed twelve weeks in 
total, including, where paragraph 8 is applied, the period preceding the adoption of 
the implementing decision referred to in paragraph 2.  

The implementing decision referred to in paragraph 2 shall be adopted in accordance 
with the procedure referred to in Article 11(1). 

When submitting the request referred to in paragraph 1, a Member State may notify 
the Commission that it considers necessary to apply the rules laid down in Article 6 
before  the  examination  of  this  request  by  the  Commission  is  concluded.  In  such  a 
case,  by  way  of  derogation  from  paragraph  3  of  this  Article,  the  Member  State 

EN 

27 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
concerned  may  apply  the  rules  laid  down  in  Article  6  from  the  day  following  the 
request and for a period not exceeding 15 days. The Member State shall indicate in 
the request the reasons for which an immediate action is required. 

The Commission shall examine the reasoned request pursuant to paragraph 1, or the 
notification  pursuant  to  paragraph  7  on  the  basis  of  substantiated  information,  in 
particular  the  information  gathered  by  the  Commission  pursuant  to  the  EU 
mechanism  for  Preparedness  and  Management  of  Crises  related  to  Migration 
(Migration Preparedness and Crisis Blueprint) and by the European Asylum Support 
Office  (EASO)  pursuant  to  Regulation  (EU)  No  439/201010,  the  European  Border 
and Coast Guard Agency pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 and the Migration 
Management  Report  referred  to  Article  6  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum 
and Migration Management]. 

Article 4 

Asylum crisis management procedure 

In  a  crisis  situation  as  referred  to  in  Article  1(2),  and  in  accordance  with  the 
procedures laid down in Article 3, Member States may, as regards applications made 
within  the  period  during  which  this  Article  is  applied,  derogate  from  Article  41  of 
Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation] as follows: 

By way of derogation from Article 41(2)(b) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum 
Procedures Regulation], Member States may in a border procedure take decisions on 
the merits of an application in cases where the applicant is of a nationality, or, in the 
case of stateless persons, a former habitual resident of a third country, for which the 
proportion of decisions granting international protection by the determining authority 
is, according to the latest available yearly Union-wide average Eurostat data, 75% or 
lower,  in  addition  to  the  cases  referred  to  in  Article  40(1)  of  Regulation  (EU) 
XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation];  

By way of derogation from Article 41(11) and (13) of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX 
[Asylum Procedures Regulation], the maximum duration of the border procedure for 
the  examination  of  applications  set  out  in  that  Article  may  be  prolonged  by  an 
additional period of maximum eight weeks. Following this period, the applicant shall 
be  authorised  to  enter  the  Member  State’s  territory  for  the  completion  of  the 
procedure for international protection.  

Article 5 

Return crisis management procedure 

In  a  crisis  situation  as  referred  to  in  Article  1(2),  and  in  accordance  with  the 
procedures laid down in Article 3, Member States may, in respect of illegally staying 
third-country  nationals  or  stateless  persons  whose  applications  were  rejected  in  the 
context  of the asylum  crisis management procedure pursuant  to  Article 4, and who 

Regulation  (EU)  No 439/2010  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  19 May  2010 
establishing a European Asylum Support Office (OJ L 132, 29.5.2010, p. 11.) 

8. 

1. 

(a) 

(b) 

1. 

10 

EN 

28 

  EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
 
(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

2. 

have no right to remain and are not allowed to remain, derogate from Article 41a of 
Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation] as follows: 

By way of derogation from  Article 41a(2) of Regulation  (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum 
Procedures  Regulation],  the  maximum  period  during  which  third-country  nationals 
or stateless persons shall be kept  at  the locations referred to  in  that Article may be 
prolonged by an additional period of maximum eight weeks; 

By way of derogation from  Article 41a(7) of Regulation  (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum 
Procedures Regulation], the period of detention  set  in  that Article shall  not  exceed 
the period referred to in point (a); 

In addition to the cases provided for by Article 6(2) of Directive XXX [recast Return 
Directive], Member States shall establish that a risk of absconding is presumed in an 
individual  case,  unless  proven  otherwise,  when  the  criterion  referred  to  in  Article 
6(1),  point  (f)  of  Directive  XXX  [recast  Return  Directive]  is  fulfilled  or  when  the 
applicant,  third-country  national  or  stateless  person  concerned  is  manifestly  and 
persistently not fulfilling the obligation to cooperate established by Article 7 of that 
Directive. 

Paragraph  1  shall  also  apply  to  applicants,  third-country  nationals  and  stateless 
persons  subject  to  the  procedure  referred  to  in  Article  41  of  Regulation  (EU) 
XXX/XXX  [Asylum  Procedures  Regulation]  whose  application  has  been  rejected 
before  the  adoption  by  the  Commission  of  a  decision  issued  in  accordance  with 
Article 3 of this Regulation, and who have no right to remain and are not allowed to 
remain after the adoption of that decision. 

Article 6 

Registration of applications for international protection in situations of crisis 

In a crisis situation as referred to in Article 1(2)(a) and in accordance with the procedure laid 
down  in  Article  3,  applications  made  within  the  period  during  which  this  Article  is  applied 
shall  be  registered  no  later  than  within  four  weeks  from  when  they  are  made  by  way  of 
derogation from Article 27 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation]. 

CHAPTER IV – TIMELIMITS IN A SITUATION OF FORCE MAJEURE  

Article 7 

Extension of registration time limit set out in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures 
Regulation] 

1. 

Where  a  Member  State  is  facing  a  situation  of  force  majeure  which  renders  it 
impossible to  comply with  the time limits  set  out  in  Article 27 of Regulation (EU) 
XXX/XXX  [Asylum  Procedures  Regulation],  that  Member  State  shall  notify  the 
Commission.  After  such  notification,  by  way  of  derogation  from  Article  27  of 
Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  Procedures  Regulation],  applications  may  be 
registered by that Member State no later than four weeks from when they are made. 
In the notification, the Member State concerned shall indicate the precise reasons for 
which  it  considers  that  this  paragraph  has  to  be  applied  and  indicate  the  period  of 
time during which it will be applied. 

EN 

29 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
2. 

1. 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

2. 

3. 

Where a Member State referred to in paragraph 1 is no longer facing a situation of 
force majeure as referred to in that paragraph which renders it impossible to comply 
with  the  time  limits  set  out  in  Article  27  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum 
Procedures  Regulation],  that  Member  State  shall,  as  soon  as  possible,  notify  the 
Commission of the termination of the situation. After such notification, the extended 
time limit set out in paragraph 1 shall no longer be applied. 

Article 8 

Extension of time limits set out in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration 
Management] 

Where  a  Member  State  is  facing  a  situation  of  force  majeure  which  renders  it 
impossible  to  comply  with  the  time  limits  set  out  in  Articles  29,  30,  31  and  35  of 
Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  and  Migration  Management],  the  Member 
State  concerned  shall  notify  the  other  Member  States  and  the  Commission.  Such 
information shall indicate the precise reasons for which the Member State considers 
that this paragraph has  to be applied. After such notification, by way of  derogation 
from Articles 29, 30, 31 and 35 of that Regulation, that Member State shall: 

submit  a  take  charge  request  as  referred  to  in  Article  29  within  four  months  of  the 
date on which the application was registered;  

reply  to  a  take  charge  request  as  referred  to  in  Article  30  within  two  months  of 
receipt of the request; 

submit  a  take  back  notification  as  referred  to  in  Article  31  within  one  month  of 
receiving  the  Eurodac  hit  or  confirm  the  receipt  within  one  month  of  such 
notification; 

carry out a transfer as referred to in Article 35 within one year of the acceptance of 
the take charge request or of the confirmation of the take back notification by another 
Member State or of the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision 
where  there  is  a  suspensive  effect  in  accordance  with  Article  33(3)  of  that 
Regulation. 

Where the Member State referred to  in  paragraph 1 does not  comply with  the time 
limits set out in paragraph 1, points (a), (b) and (d), the responsibility for examining 
the  application  for  international  protection  pursuant  to  Regulation  XXX/XXX 
[Asylum and Migration Management] shall lie with it or be transferred to it. 

Where  a  Member  State  is  facing  a  situation  of  force  majeure  which  renders  it 
impossible  to  receive  persons  it  is  responsible  for  pursuant  to  Regulation  (EU) 
XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration  Management], it shall  notify the other Member 
States and the Commission, indicating the precise reasons for such impossibility. In 
such cases, the requesting or notifying Member State shall not carry out the transfer 
until the Member State responsible is no longer facing a situation of  force majeure. 
Where, because of the persistence of the situation of force majeure or for any other 
reason, the transfer does not take place within one year of the acceptance of the take 
charge  request  or  of  the  confirmation  of  the  take  back  notification  by  another 
Member State or of the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision 
where  there  is  a  suspensive  effect  in  accordance  with  Article  33(3)  of  that 
Regulation,  by  way  of  derogation  from  Article  35  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX 
[Asylum  and  Migration  Management],  the  Member  State  responsible  shall  be 

EN 

30 

  EN 

 
4. 

1. 

2. 

1. 

relieved of its obligations to take charge of or to take back the person concerned and 
responsibility shall be transferred to the requesting or notifying Member State. 

Where a Member State is no longer facing a situation of force majeure as referred to 
in paragraphs 1 and 3 which renders it impossible to comply with the time limits set 
out  in  Articles  29,  30,  31  and  35  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum  and 
Migration  Management]  or  to  receive  persons  it  is  responsible  for  pursuant  to  that 
Regulation, that Member State shall as soon as possible notify the Commission and 
the other Member States of the termination of the situation. After such notification, 
the time limits set out in paragraphs 1 and 3 shall no longer be applied in respect of 
new  applications  for  international  protection  made  or  third-country  nationals  or 
stateless  persons  who  are  found  to  be  illegally  staying  on  or  after  the  date  of  that 
notification. 

Article 9 

Extension of the timeframes for solidarity measures  

Where  a  Member  State  is  facing  a  situation  of  force  majeure  which  renders  it 
impossible to comply with the obligation to undertake solidarity measures within the 
timeframes  established  in  Articles  47  and  53(1)  of  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX 
[Asylum and Migration Management] and Article 2 of this Regulation, it shall notify 
the  Commission  and  the  other  Member  States  without  delay.  The  Member  State 
concerned shall indicate the precise reasons for which it considers that it is facing a 
situation of force majeure and provide all necessary information for that effect. After 
such  notification,  by  way  of  derogation  from  the  timeframes  established  by  those 
Articles,  the  timeframe  for  undertaking  solidarity  measures  established  in  those 
Articles shall be suspended for a maximum period of six months. 

Where a Member State is no longer facing a situation of force majeure, that Member 
State shall immediately  notify the Commission  and the other Member States of the 
cessation of the situation. After such notification, the extended timeframe set out in 
paragraph 1 shall cease to apply. 

CHAPTER V – GRANTING OF IMMEDIATE PROTECTION 

Article 10 

Granting of immediate protection status 

In  a  crisis  situation  as  referred  to  in  Article  1(2)(a),  and  on  the  basis  of  an 
implementing act adopted by the Commission in accordance with paragraph 4 of this 
Article,  Member  States  may  suspend 
the  examination  of  applications  for 
international  protection  in  accordance  with  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Asylum 
Procedures Regulation] and Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Qualification Regulation] 
in respect of displaced persons from third countries who are facing a high degree of 
risk  of  being  subject  to  indiscriminate  violence,  in  exceptional  situations  of  armed 
conflict,  and  who  are  unable  to  return  to  their  country  of  origin.  In  such  a  case, 
Member  States  shall  grant  immediate  protection  status  to  the  persons  concerned, 
unless they represent a danger to the national security or public order of the Member 

EN 

31 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
2. 

3. 

4. 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

1. 

2. 

State.  Such  status  shall  be  without  prejudice  to  their  ongoing  application  for 
international protection in the relevant Member State.  

Member States shall ensure that beneficiaries of immediate protection have effective 
access  to  all  the  rights  laid  down  in  Regulation  (EU)  XXX/XXX  [Qualification 
Regulation] applicable to beneficiaries of subsidiary protection.  

Member  States  shall  resume  the  examination  of  the  applications  for  international 
protection that have been suspended pursuant to paragraph 1 after a maximum of one 
year. 

The Commission shall, by means of an implementing decision: 

establish that there is a situation of crisis on the basis of the elements referred to in 
Article 3; 

establish  that  there  is  a  need  to  suspend  the  examination  of  applications  for 
international protection; 

define  the  specific  country  of  origin,  or  a  part  of  a  specific  country  of  origin,  in 
respect of the persons referred to in paragraph 1; 

establish the date from which this Article shall be applied and set out the time period 
during which applications for international protection of displaced person as referred 
to in point (a) may be suspended and immediate protection status shall be granted. 

CHAPTER VI – GENERAL AND FINAL PROVISIONS 

Article 11 

Adoption of implementing acts 

The  Commission  shall  adopt  implementing  acts  in  respect  of  authorising  the 
application of the derogatory procedural rules referred to in Articles 4, 5 and 6, and 
triggering the granting of immediate protection status in accordance with Article 10. 
Those  implementing  acts  shall  be  adopted  in  accordance  with  the  examination 
procedure referred to in Article 12(2). 

On  duly  justified  imperative  grounds  of  urgency,  due  to  the  situation  of  crisis  as 
defined in Article 1(2) in a Member State, the Commission shall adopt immediately 
applicable  implementing  acts  in  respect  of  authorising  the  application  of  the 
derogatory  procedural  rules  referred  to  in  Articles  4,  5  and  6,  and  triggering  the 
granting  of  immediate  protection  status  in  accordance  with  Article  10.  Those 
implementing acts  shall  be adopted in  accordance with  the procedure referred to  in 
Article 12(3). 

3. 

The implementing acts shall remain in force for a period not exceeding one year. 

Article 12 

Committee procedure 

1. 

For the implementing act referred to in Article 3, the Commission shall be assisted 
by  a  committee.  That  committee  shall  be  a  committee  within  the  meaning  of 
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. 

EN 

32 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
2. 

3. 

Where  reference  is  made  to  this  paragraph,  Article  5  of  Regulation  (EU)  No 
182/2011 shall apply. 

Where  reference  is  made  to  this  paragraph,  Article  8  of  Regulation  (EU)  No 
182/2011, in conjunction with Article 5 thereof, shall apply. 

Council Directive 2001/55/EC is repealed with effect from xxx (date). 

Article 14 

Repeal 

Article 15 

Entry into force 

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in 
the Official Journal of the European Union. 

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the Member States in 
accordance with the Treaties. 

Done at Brussels, 

For the European Parliament 
The President 

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

33 

  EN