EP proposes legally-binding burden sharing mechanism

The European Parliament yesterday proposed a legally-binding burden-sharing mechanism, which would enable immigrants to be allocated to EU countries on a compulsory basis.

This is the first time that a proposal for a legally-binding reallocation system in the EU has been made.

The proposal was formally made during the EP's Civil Liberties Committee by Dutch Liberal MEP Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, who wants the scheme to be in place by the end of 2011.

The MEP was responsible for drawing up Parliament's position on the review of the EU's controversial Dublin Regulation, which places the responsibility for immigrants and asylum-seekers on the country of the first point of entry.

This means that if immigrants moved to other countries they risked being returned to the first country where they had arrived.

Last December, the European Commission had proposed to suspend the Dublin rules with respect to countries facing severe migratory pressures, such as Malta.

Presenting her draft report on the review of the Dublin Regulation, Ms Hennis-Plasschaert advocated an ambitious approach.

In addition to suspending the Dublin rules, she is now proposing establishing a legally-binding scheme that "reallocates beneficiaries of international protection from member states faced with specific and disproportionate pressures to others in consultation with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees while ensuring that the reallocation follows non-discriminatory, transparent and unequivocal rules".

The report adds that this should bind on all member states in order "to provide effective support to those member states that faced specific and disproportionate pressures on their national systems due, in particular, to their geographical or demographic situation".

Intervening in the debate, Nationalist MEP Simon Busuttil, a committee member, welcomed Ms Hennis-Plasschaert's proposal saying this was the next logical step after the introduction of the voluntary burden-sharing mechanism in the Immigration and Asylum Pact adopted last October.

However, Dr Busuttil later cautioned that the road to legally bind EU countries to accept the reallocation of immigrants was long and full of obstacles. "This will not be easy and we will need to overcome a great deal of resistance," he said.

Despite the likely resistance, he insisted the way forward was not to veto the immigration pact, as the Labour Party had insisted last year, or to renounce the Dublin Regulation, as proposed by Azzjoni Nazzjonali, but to play by the rules and, if necessary, change them.

"Labour and AN want to take us back to Mintoff-type international relations, which make us look like a pariah state. Those days are thankfully over and our approach is fundamentally different," he insisted.

"We cannot renounce our international obligations as (Labour leader) Joseph Muscat is now suggesting because our country cannot afford to lose its reputation as a credible and reliable partner in the international community.

"We do not renounce the Dublin Regulation but we try to change it. We do not veto the immigration pact but we build on it and insist forcefully until what is voluntary becomes binding in nature," Dr Busuttil said.

Dr Busuttil said the choice with the pact was never one between a voluntary or a legally-binding commitment on reallocation but simply a choice between a voluntary mechanism or nothing.

"That is why vetoing the pact, as Labour wanted, would have been downright imprudent and would have dealt a deadly blow to our country's credibility," Dr Busuttil said.