By Laura Marino
On 1 December 2024, President Ursula von der Leyen began her second mandate at the helm of the European Commission, leading a new team of Commissioners. Together, they’ve set bold priorities for the Commission from 2024 to 2029.
Among these priorities, there is the responsibility to define EU policy regarding migration, asylum, and border policy. Key issues are implementing the Pact on Migration and Asylum, strengthening Europe’s internal security, and promoting integrated border management.
The new European Commission’s mandate and vision on migration
On 5 November 2024, Magnus Brunner, Commissioner-designate for Internal Affairs and Migration, skilfully appealed during his hearing to both conservatives and the centre-left. He endorsed stricter EU deportation policies, advocating for an enhanced Frontex border agency, and developing tools for internal security, while also supporting legal migration pathways to attract talents – a key socialist priority. This balanced approach helped him avoid criticism from major factions or extremes. Brunner also emphasised the importance of collaborating with the European Parliament, anticipating that its larger right-wing contingent might enable progress on stricter migration and deportation policies – areas that historically faced resistance.
To complement Mr. Brunner’s work, other Commissioners will likely oversee some aspects of the new vision. Henna Virkkunen, Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy, will probably work to reform the Return Directive. Dubravka Šuica, Commissioner for the Mediterranean, further has the mandate to reinforce cooperation with southern Mediterranean states and maintain or even elevate the forms of arrangements settled with third countries, such as Egypt and Tunisia. On a similar note, Jozef Sìkela, Commissioner for International Partnerships, is going to review aid and cooperation policies on a broader scale to target irregular migration sources.
A stricter approach to the EU pact on migration and asylum
The Pact on Migration and Asylum (Pact) is defined by the Commission as a “set of new rules managing migration and establishing a common asylum system at the EU level”. The Pact intends to 1) prioritise the security of external borders, 2) make the procedures of the asylum system and refugee status more efficient, 3) create an effective system of burden sharing between Member States, and 4) promote international partnerships.
However, according to recent reports, the Pact is expected to soon be reinforced with more stringent measures.
The new rules are expected to delineate the rights and obligations of migrants who have exhausted all legal avenues to remain in the EU, with rules being clarified for deporting them either to their country of origin or to a third country where they have resided for a significant period.
Another likely direction undertaken is reducing the liberty of movement of migrants chosen for deportation by ordering them to “check-in” to a migrant centre, permitting the authorities to reduce the chances of escaping. But it is not clear if this could involve actual detention or requiring individuals to a local police station until the scheduled deportation.
Nevertheless, such centres come with significant legal challenges, as demonstrated by Italy’s groundbreaking plan to transfer migrants to detention centres in Albania, a non-EU country. Italian judges rejected the legitimacy of the detentions due to the impossibility of recognizing the countries of origin of the detained individuals as safe countries, rendering the border procedure inapplicable. The judges also requested clarification from the Court of Justice of the EU over the “doubtful” compatibility of the government’s decree with European regulations. This policy has as such faced controversy from the very beginning and has been mired in legal battles.
The so-called “return hubs” proposal
What is mostly heavily criticized by civil society, NGOs, and humanitarian operators is the fact that the EU is considering the idea of establishing “return hubs”, i.e., offshore centres for people deported from the bloc. The idea gained traction in the months following the EU elections in June, where a clear shift to the rights coloured the Parliament’s composition. Following this view, last November, the Italian authorities tried to transfer certain groups of asylum seekers to detention centres in Albania while their asylum claims were processed in Italy. Both Commissioner Brunner and Commission President von der Leyen expressed positive opinions on the matter, referring to it as a potential way to deal with irregular arrivals.
Apparently, an official proposal could be realised this coming March. In effect, it seems that Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson explored the idea of the return hub with Brunner himself. Furthermore, Kristersson expressed these views during his meeting with the Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer. United in their conservative political outlook, especially on migration policy, both leaders have urged the European Union to address irregular migration.
The underlying contradictions
In his initial statement of the confirmation hearing, Mr. Brunner advocated for stronger enforcement mechanisms but not at the expense of human rights. Specifically, he affirmed that “human rights are non-negotiable” to preserve the balance between solidarity and responsibility. The direction of the agenda, however, clearly shows some serious contradictions with that statement.
In fact, outsourcing asylum or return procedures comes with serious human rights risks. As underlined by Amnesty International, every attempt at implementing such measures has resulted in violations, including cases of refoulement, arbitrary detention, denial of access to asylum and legal aid, failure to identify vulnerable individuals, and a lack of compliance with the legal and reception standards established under EU law. Moreover, these policies have caused significant harm to the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of asylum systems, undermined the international refugee protection framework, and jeopardized the EU’s autonomy and credibility in its external relations. Lastly, as Human Rights Watch stresses, the EU should implement measures to address forced displacement and irregular movements more humanely. Rather than focusing on shifting responsibilities for refugee protection to other countries, these measures should prioritise ensuring stronger safeguards and better protection for those in need. Above all, such initiatives should align with the EU’s legal and ethical standards, including its obligations under international human rights law. The emphasis should be on creating systems that promote dignity, respect human rights, and provide significant support to fragile populations instead of externalising this crucial role.
About the author
Laura Marino holds a Master’s in Planning and Management of Social Work from the University of Parma, with a thesis on the Ukrainian migration crisis. She has experience in advocacy, research, and fieldwork on migration and human rights, organizing educational programs and social initiatives. Passionate about social inclusion, she has also been actively involved in volunteer projects.
European Studies Review 