Pour le moment, c\u2019est le texte Dublin III qui r\u00e9git la politique migratoire de l\u2019UE. Selon ce texte, les r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s doivent soumettre leur demande d'asile dans le premier pays de l'UE qu'ils atteignent. Cependant, ce m\u00e9canisme entra\u00eene une r\u00e9partition disproportionn\u00e9e des demandes d'asile sur les pays du sud de l'Europe, qui sont la premi\u00e8re porte d'entr\u00e9e pour les migrants en provenance du Proche-Orient, d'Asie ou d'Afrique. Le nouveau pacte europ\u00e9en vise donc \u00e0 r\u00e9\u00e9quilibrer la donne en permettant aux migrants de faire leur demande d\u2019asile dans des pays o\u00f9 ils ont des liens familiaux, o\u00f9 ils ont travaill\u00e9 ou \u00e9tudi\u00e9, ou alors dans un \u00c9tat leur ayant d\u00e9livr\u00e9 un visa par le pass\u00e9.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Un nouveau m\u00e9canisme de solidarit\u00e9 est \u00e9galement pr\u00e9vu par la r\u00e9forme.<\/strong> In simple terms, if a country is faced with a large influx of migrants and feels that it cannot bear the responsibility of receiving them, it will be able to request the activation of a \u201cbinding solidarity mechanism\u201d. This decision must be taken by the Commission. In such a case, all member states would be required to contribute according to their economic and demographic strength. Theoretically, a state that fails to meet its solidarity obligations could be heavily sanctioned by the EU Court of Justice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is this new mechanism that is dividing opinion. While this addition would have helped to better manage the migratory crisis in 2015, several Eastern European countries are opposed to the introduction of such a solidarity mechanism. Hungary and Poland, historically known for their reticence towards non-European migrants, voted against, while Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia abstained. Poland\u2019s Prime Minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, described the pact as \u201ca diktat aimed at changing European culture\u201d <\/strong>[1].<\/p>\n\n\n\n Conscient du d\u00e9fi, le Parlement Europ\u00e9en a publi\u00e9 une proposition de r\u00e8glement le 14 d\u00e9cembre 2021 [2]. On y retrouve ledit m\u00e9canisme de solidarit\u00e9, mais aussi une proc\u00e9dure d\u2019urgence sp\u00e9ciale pour la gestion de la migration.<\/strong>Cette derni\u00e8re offre la possibilit\u00e9 \u00e0 un \u00c9tat membre de d\u00e9roger \u00e0 ses responsabilit\u00e9s en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accueil des migrants s\u2019il subit une situation d\u2019instrumentalisation de la migration<\/strong>. Le conseil de l\u2019UE donne la d\u00e9finition suivante de l\u2019instrumentalisation des migrants: \u201csituations in which a third country or non-state actor has (\u2026) encouraged or facilitated the irregular movement of third-country nationals to (\u2026) a territory, in order for them to reach the external border of the Member States\u201d <\/em>[3]. Dans le contexte du r\u00e8glement, les \u00c9tats membres s\u2019inqui\u00e8tent de voir certains acteurs, tels que la Bi\u00e9lorussie, faciliter la migration irr\u00e9guli\u00e8re vers les pays Baltes, membres de l\u2019espace Schengen.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to the European Economic and Social Committee, this exceptional procedure raises a number of questions [4]. Several NGOs, including the Ligue des droits de l\u2019Homme, have also expressed concern [5]. Indeed, standardizing such measures at a time when the EU does not have enough time and space to guarantee the rights of migrants turned back at the border is tantamount to jeopardizing their fundamental rights. According to the Ligue des droits de l\u2019Homme, the proposal is synonymous with:<\/p>\n\n\n\n In a joint statement published in September 2022, over 80 NGOs declared that approval of this proposed regulation would result in the deconstruction of Europe\u2019s asylum system [6], even though the pact was initially intended to make the system fairer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n L\u2019ASSEDEL soutient cette position et appelle les \u00c9tats membres et les d\u00e9put\u00e9s \u00e0 demeurer vigilants face \u00e0 l\u2019introduction de d\u00e9rogations au r\u00e9gime d\u2019asile europ\u00e9en commun au sein d\u2019autres propositions de r\u00e9formes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Il est certain qu\u2019aucun \u00c9tat membre ne devrait supporter seul la responsabilit\u00e9 d\u2019accueillir des dizaines de milliers de r\u00e9fugi\u00e9s. Les \u00e9v\u00e9nements r\u00e9cents \u00e0 Lampedusa montre bien l\u2019importance d\u2019une r\u00e9forme de notre syst\u00e8me migratoire [7].<\/p>\n\n\n\n Alors, comme l\u2019a dit Mme von der Leyen dans son discours d\u00e9but septembre, \u201clet\u2019s finish the job\u201d <\/em>[8]. But let\u2019s finish it while respecting the rights and freedoms of migrants, rather than in the interests of a few anti-immigration states.<\/p>\n\n\nUn syst\u00e8me de d\u00e9rogation critiqu\u00e9<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n
\n
