The European Commission’s controversial proposal for new EU rules for “returning” asylum seekers is both morally wrong as well as most likely illegal and contrary to the conventions, says the Red-Green Allianc’s Member of the European Parliament, Per Clausen. He therefore believes that the proposal should be sent back to the drawing board:
We cannot and should not have a proposal that is based on a practice that is not only fundamentally inhumane, but also, as a minimum, is at odds with the conventions, if not outright in breach of them. So much for the EU’s talk of the rule of law.
He continues:
From what I have seen of the proposal so far, I think it is once again marked by two things: the clear rightward shift in the European Commission’s policy, and that it has been rushed through in order to meet an arbitrary deadline that the Commission President herself has set. I believe it should be sent back to the drawing desk.
From directive to regulation
It is already clear from the first page of the EU Commission’s proposal how big the changes actually are. Where the current rules take the form of an EU directive, they will now morph into a so-called regulation instead. This means that the new rules will be directly valid in the member states, instead of the current system where EU rules must first be implementet into national legislation.
Although Denmark, through the opt-out, has the possibility of staying out of the rules, I am concerned that in this way the possibility of adapting the provisions to national conditions and legislation is being removed, says Per Clausen.
Controversial “Rwanda plans” are included
Among Per Clausen’s major points of criticism is that the European Commission has chosen to include the deeply controversial deportation camps that are located outside the borders of EU countries. These are the ones that in Denmark are known as “the Rwanda plan”, while in EU newspeak they have now been phrased as the much more neutral “return centres”.
He notes that it is a subject so sensitive that even the large Socialist group in the European Parliament has been warning against them:
The fact that they insist on having the highly controversial “departure centres” – or Rwanda plans as they are known in Denmark and the UK – shows how willing they are to trample all over political opposition at this point. Even the Danish Social democrats’ own political group has been warning against it, but it has done little to help.
He continues:
This is happening despite great concerns for human rights and despite the fact that courts have repeatedly ended up blocking such initiatives. It shows, that the most important thing for the European Commission is not to secure people’s rights, but to try to sweep the problem under the carpet. But out of sight, out of mind is not a viable policy when it comes to human destinies.
Controversial presentation
It is not only the content of the controversial proposal that is being criticized by both Per Clausen and a number of NGOs, but also way it is being done, that is problematic:
Presenting such a large and controversial package so shortly before the European Parliament is set to debate it with the European Commission, is simply not serious. It makes it clear, that Commission does not want anyone to have time to delve into the details of what is being presented.
Per Clausen concludes by commenting that he finds the timing of the presentation to be a lack of respect for the European Parliament:
Unfortunately, it also seems to be a clear tactic from the President of the European Commission, who has become accustomed to making important proposals very shortly before they are to be debated. It is clear that she does not want a real debate about her proposal – and that is not only harmful to democracy but also a lack of respect for the European Parliament.
