Changes from report parliamentary committee draft to plenary report

Every day 34,000 men, women and children are forced to leave their homes due to conflict, persecution, violence and human rights violations. This figure has risen steadily year on year, resulting in more than 65 million people fleeing for their lives, split two to one between internally displaced people and refugees. An estimated 12.4 million people were displaced in 2015 alone. With ever-rising numbers and no pauses in the conflicts and violence responsible, there is an urgent need for more effective, permanent solutions on a global scale.

The Geneva Convention: An international law instrument in the aftermath of 2nd WW

Following the Second World War, many countries realised that there was a deep need to promote and further establish international law instruments. One of the objectives was to create an international instrument that would ensure that people in need of protection would be granted refuge. In the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 Relating to the Status of Refugees, the international community has laid down binding rules of international humanitarian law that delineate who, in what circumstances, is to be treated as a refugee and how they are to be cared for. All EU Member States are signatories to that Convention. Although the European Union as such is not a signatory to the Convention, Article 63(1) EC expressly provides that the common policy on asylum must be adopted in accordance with the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol.

United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) was created in 1950, during the aftermath of the Second World War, to help millions of people who had fled or lost their homes. UNHCR serves as the ‘guardian’ of the 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol. The UNHCR is a central worldwide actor providing support to countries hosting refugees and assisting States in their policy responses. In order for the European Union to reinforce its work on refugee protection and resettlement, it is critical to build upon the work of UNHCR.

Resettlement: one safe and legal pathway for international protection

The Common European Asylum System, currently under revision, addresses different elements such as increased responsibility sharing for welcoming refugees, reception conditions, common procedures and rules for qualification. However, there is a gap when it comes to addressing the need for safe and legal arrivals to the EU.

Increased and more effective safe and legal routes into the EU have been called for in numerous European Parliament resolutions over the years, as well as by the European Commission, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and many civil society actors. A UN Summit on refugees and migrants, and a refugee summit convened by President Obama in September 2016, also called for safe and legal pathways, including resettlement.

While resettlement shares some similarities with migration pathways, it is a distinct pathway. Resettlement must therefore be recognised as complementary to, and not a replacement of, other legal routes to international protection, including humanitarian visas, extended family reunification, and humanitarian admission programmes.

UNHCR is mandated by its Statute and the UN General Assembly Resolutions to undertake resettlement as one out of three durable solutions. The official definition of “resettlement” in the UNHCR Resettlement Handbook is as follows:

Resettlement involves the selection and transfer of refugees from a State in which they have sought protection to a third State which has agreed to admit them – as refugees – with permanent residence status. The status provided ensures protection against refoulement and provides a resettled refugee and his/her family or dependants with access to rights similar to those enjoyed by nationals. Resettlement also carries with it the opportunity to eventually become a naturalized citizen of the resettlement country.

Resettlement is, by design, a tool to provide protection and a durable solution to refugees. It is with this background that the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the International Organisation for Migration, the European Council on Refugees and Exiles, the International Rescue Committee, Caritas, the Red Cross, Amnesty International and many more stakeholders, mean that linking resettlement with third countries cooperation in migration matters is not a sustainable choice. It moves away from resettlement as a protection tool for the most vulnerable refugees. Resettlement must continue to be based on the needs of the most vulnerable refugees. It is worth noting that UNHCR already views resettlement as the last alternative, meaning that when they assess a case other durable solutions have already been reviewed. Determining geographical priorities based on third countries cooperation in the area of migration and leveraging resettlement to reach foreign policy objectives would therefore de facto jeopardize a humanitarian, needs-based and international protection approach. Similarly, it is essential that the Union framework align with UNHCR when it comes to eligibility criteria used in resettlement programmes.

A Union Framework that complements international structures for resettlement

In order to ensure that the EU framework reinforces global resettlement efforts, as well as upholds international law, resettlement must be underpinned by protection considerations for the persons concerned. A European Union Resettlement Framework should be based on humanitarian needs, contribute to global resettlement needs and alleviate protracted refugee situations. For this reason, the Framework must be aligned with already existing international resettlement structures in order to be complementary to existing efforts, to be able to further increase EU member states participation in resettlement, and most importantly, to actually function on the ground. This will be ensured in the following ways:

o The role of UNHCR as the main institution that refers resettlement cases to Member States is reiterated (Article 10). This does not mean that Member States or other relevant organisations cannot do referrals; it is only stating how resettlement already works on the ground. However, it puts in place safeguards and it avoids duplication of procedures or structures.

o Geographical priorities (Article 4 and 7) should be based on the Global Projected Resettlement Needs publication that UNHCR releases every year. This is where we can find the most thorough assessment of where the needs for resettlement are most urgent in the world, and it should clearly guide the Union Resettlement Framework.

o The role of the High-Level Resettlement Committee should be more clearly aligned with existing structures. Following the Annual Tripartite Consultations on Resettlement (ATRC) the High-Level Resettlement Committee shall meet to outline the main components of the resettlement plan as well as the different resettlement schemes. The membership of the high-level resettlement committee has been broadened in order to ensure more transparency and quality.

A Union Framework that increases numbers

Europe has 23.8% of the world's GDP (OECD data, 2014), yet EU Member States host only around 8% of the world's refugees. This places a disproportionate burden on developing countries, which host the vast majority. 22 European countries resettled 13,040 persons in 2015 (9,629 to 17 EU Member States), with Europe contributing, on average, approximately 10 per cent to global resettlement intakes over the past five years. By contrast, that same year, the U.S. resettled 69,933 refugees.

EU Member States have displayed an unwillingness to create adequate legal and safe pathways of entry into the region. As a result, people on the move continue to be left with no other option but to turn to smugglers and embark on dangerous irregular journeys. If we want to reduce the need for dangerous journeys, reduce loss of lives and reliance on smuggling networks, this will only become a reality when the number of places offered is credible and meaningful. The Union Resettlement Framework should target to resettle at a minimum 25% of the Annual Projected Global Resettlement Needs. In 2017 this would mean approximately 250,000 people.

A Union Framework that supports national programmes

The EU Member States that have running and successful resettlement programmes should be encouraged to continue and to expand, share their experience and pool resources. The EU Member States that are just starting their first resettlement programmes should be given all support necessary for their first experience to be rewarding and positive. The EU Member States that have little or no experience of resettlement need to find a robust structure that can help them get started, which includes an exchange of best practices with other Member States, and operational and technical support including from [The European Union Asylum Agency]. If the Union Resettlement Framework enforces common procedures, eligibility criteria or exclusion grounds also on national programmes, it runs the risk of discouraging national efforts in the field of resettlement.

At the same time it is clear we need to build incentive for Member States to participate in the Union Resettlement Framework. As a balance between these two objectives, it is suggested that Member States keep the EUR 6,000 per resettled person that they receive from AMIF, and keep the raised number of EUR 10,000 per resettled person when Member States choose to resettle under the Union Framework.

A Union Framework that provides a durable solution

The basis of resettlement as a durable solution is that receiving States are expected to provide resettled persons with permanent residence. A one-year or three years residence cannot be seen as a durable solution by anyone. Therefore, it is vital that Member States are able to issue residence permits that are more favourable than those suggested in [the Qualification Regulation]. On this point, it is suggested that Member States may issue residence permits of permanent or unlimited validity on terms that are more favourable as referred to in Article 13 of Council Directive 2003/109/EC, as amended by Directive 2011/51/EU [the Long Term Residence Directive].

A Common European Asylum System must have several safe and legal pathways

Our common asylum system cannot continue to exclusively focus on making it as hard as possible for people fleeing to reach the territory of the European Union. Safe and legal pathways, together with good reception and integration structures, is absolutely vital for a functioning European asylum system. The right to asylum and international law must be respected. It is not a choice that Member States can opt-out of. A robust Union Resettlement Framework that ensures added quality and quantity to already existing European resettlement efforts is one fundamental part of such a system – but must be coupled with other legal pathways as well. The European Union must step up our common efforts and prove that our continent and our Union can take our fair share of the global responsibility.