European Union Common Asylum, and Migration Policies: Tampere, Hague and Stockholm Progammes

1. European Union Common Asylum, and Migration Policies: Tampere, Hague and Stockholm Progammes 12 March 2012

2. Tampere Programme adopted under the Finnish Presidency by the European Council December 1999 followed by the Commission’s Action Plan covering period up to 2004 Hague Programme adopted under the Dutch Presidency in December 2004 followed by an Action Plan coverign epriod up to 2009 Stockholm Programme adopted by the Swedish Presidency in December 2009 follwoed by an Action Plan covering period up to 2014 The Programmes for AFSJ

3. Develop common policies and acquis in the areas of: Immigration and asylum External border management Rights of Third Country Nationals in the EU Cooperation with third countries: the External Dimension Objectives

4. Contestations shaping Programmes • Free movement (positive freedom) paradigm vs. security paradigm (negative freedom to achieve the former) • Executive driven vs. open, accessible and accountable decision making • Commission vs. European Council • Divisions among Member States

5. Political and institutional context shapes content of programmes and performance • Institutional, treaty based developments, Amsterdam and Lisbon treaties • Impact of 9/11 and 2004 enlargement (Fortress Europe syndrome) • Reflections and criticism against security paradigm and efforts to achieve a “balance” between rights and security • Influence of Presidencies: Scandinavian vs. Dutch

6. Tampere Programme – First Phase • Develop cooperation/partnerships with countries of origin and transit • Develop a “common” asylum system respectful of the right to asylum and the 1951 Geneva Convention • Fair treatment of TCN and combating racism and xenophobia • Management of migration flows

7. Legal Texts on Asylum and Migration – First Phase • Visa list amendments February 2003 (proposal 2006) • European Refugee Fund 2002 • EURODAC finger prints system December 2001 • Carrier responsibilities June 2001 • Temporary protection for asylum seekers July 2001 • Minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers, January 2003 • Implementation of Dublin Convention, February 2003 • Family reunification, February 2003

8. Legal Texts on Asylum and Migration – First Phase (Cntd.) Status of TNCs who are long-term nationals, November 2003 • Minimum standards on procedures for granting and withdrawing refugee status, (procedures directive) April 2004 • Minimum standards for the qualification of TNCs as refugees, (qualifications directives) April 2004 • Minimum standards for use of Refugee Fund and burden sharing, October 2004

9. Hague Programme – Second Phase • A common European asylum system • Legal migration and the fight against illegal migration (new policy area but no intention of leading to EU-wide immigration system or even icnrease legal immigration into memeber states) • Integration of third-country nationals (rather than fair treatment as in TP) • External dimension of asylum and migration policy (Beyond nebulous ‘partnerships’ seek to promote refugee protection beyond the EU and incorporate migration management into foreign policy) • Management of migration flows (borders, biometrics and visas) • Call on Commission to monitor implementation

10. Hague Programme – Outputs • A policy plan for economic migration and a range of mechanisms for exchange of information on integration policies including CBPs, handbook of integration, integration reports, an “integration portal”, biannual “ European integration forum”, integration fund • Moved into second phase of CEAS • Continue to develop integrated border management system including creation of FRONTEX • Cooperation with third countries under Global Approach to Migration (2005) e.g. Mobility partnerships, visa facilitation and border management assistance, readmission agreements

11. Stockholm Programme – Background • Global recession leads to caution with respect to policy development priority to job creation for citizens • Quadro Group (Cyrpus, Greece, Italy and Malta) call for solidarity in managin mixed flows • Sustainable and manageable system to deal with irregular crossings and asylum remain as a long term goal focus on quick fixes • LT institutional reform comes late in the Fall, LT comes into force in December and new commissioners appointed in february 2010 • With EP legislative process likely to take longer • Policy coherence between immigration/asylum and foreign, developments, trade, employment, health and education policies demands • Effective evalutations of current and new policy proposals, training of officials, greater interaction with civil society

12. Stockholm Programme – Third Phase I • Global Approach to Migration expands on HP policies and given priority, offer “carrots” to third countries in return for combating/preventing illegal migration, develop “migration profiles” for third countries • Migration and Development with 3 priorities: facilitate remittance transfers, work with diaspora, promote circular migration, study climate change and migration • Labor Migration curtailed ambitions compared to TP and HP regarding EU wide labor migration no reference to developing a common labor migration strategy but “Blue Card” legislation for highly skilled as well as open way to legislation for intracompany transfers, paid trainees and seasonal workers

13. Stockholm Programme – Third Phase II • Rights of TCNs: grant “rights and obligations comparable to those of the EU citizens” by 2014 resembeling TP forgotten by HP, call on Commission to evaluate current legislation, evaluate family reunification to ensure implementation of integration measures and allow MSs to introduce integration capacity requirements for spouses • Integration: LT directly refers to integration giving EU solid basis of developing measures to support MS in their national strategies and expand on HP mechanisms • Illegal Migration. Sustainable return policy remains central with renewed efforts to sign readmission agreements, no clear policy on what to do with those who can not be returned, earlier SP drafts included rules for regularization • Unaccompanied minors (new)

14. Stockholm Programme – Third Phase III • Asylum: Common approach strived since TP basic elements of harmonized policy in place but completing final pieces increasingly difficult. • Common Area of Asylum: HP aimed at CEAS with common procedures and system to recongize refugees by 2010 but deadline pushed to 2012 without specifics, calls on Commission to “consider” new legislative insturments or joint processing of asylum applkications, new tools such as European Asylum Support Office, in earlier drafts MS recognizing each other’s asylum decision dropped. • Sharing of responsibility and solidarity between MS: Only voluntary could be agreed. • External dimension: Promoting refugee protection beyond the EU and voluntary resettlement schemes especially for the vulnerable promoted.

15. For further research see document with weblinks but also EURasylum Portal: immigration control and asylum in Europe: http://www.eurasylum.org/Portal/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabindex=4&tabid=4