As the EU Council decided on 13 June to prolong temporary protection for people displaced by the war in Ukraine until March 2026, over 130 civil society organisations call on the EU to go beyond temporary renewals and adopt a common, future-proof approach that would lead to long-term residence and that would prevent millions of people in the EU from becoming undocumented.

Temporary protection (as foreseen in the EU Temporary Protection Directive) allows millions of displaced people to reside, work, study and access health care and social protection in the EU. But one-year renewals (which are dependent on decisions taken by the EU Council), leave people in uncertainty about future prospects.

By focusing specifically on one-year renewals of temporary protection, little attention is paid to future scenarios where temporary protection might end, for instance if there is no longer a majority of member states supporting such renewals.

The Temporary Protection Directive foresees that once its protection regime ends, people are channelled into national asylum or migration procedures. But this comes with risks for both displaced people and national administrations. National administrations would risk being overwhelmed by a sudden surge in requests for permits on other grounds, including asylum. Beneficiaries of temporary protection would risk spending months in uncertainty, with less rights than those granted by temporary protection. For instance, a person seeking asylum is often not able to work in the first six months as they wait for the result of their asylum claim.

Because requirements for asylum, work and other residence permits are more stringent than those for temporary protection, and because of lengthy procedures and understaffed administrations, many would risk becoming undocumented.

The signatories urge the EU to propose timely, coordinated, collective and future-proof options for the transition out of temporary protection. This future-proof solution must grant the same level of rights as temporary protection but should last longer and give access to long-term residence permits.

Quotes

Laetitia Van der Vennet, Senior Advocacy Officer, Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants, said: “Failing to think about scenarios once temporary protection officially ends means that millions of people might fall through the cracks of bureaucracy and become undocumented. We need the EU to adopt a common permit that grants at least the same rights as temporary protection, lasts for at least two years and gives people access to longer-term residence in the EU”.

Katharine Woolrych, Advocacy Specialist, HIAS Europe, said: “A one-year extension of the TPD is a welcome move to ensure displaced people have continued access to status and rights. In parallel however we urgently need EU leadership to avoid an uncoordinated transition out of temporary protection. Perpetual renewals of “temporary” protection simply kick the can down the road.”

Ganna Dudinska, Senior Policy Advisor, International Rescue Committee, said: “While we welcome the decision to extend the temporary protection regime for one year to offer some predictability to displaced people, it does not provide a longer-term solution. The policymakers at the EU and national level should use this momentum to develop and offer displaced persons clear pathways to durability taking into consideration the specific needs of the most vulnerable individuals.”

As EU election results come in, the Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM), and others have warned politicians against conceding ground to an extreme right bloc seeking to further erode human rights and the rule of law.

In a linked briefing, PICUM has highlighted how right and far-right parties have pledged to increase human rights violations across Europe, with migrants and racialised people bearing the brunt. This includes: 

• Extending a foreign policy that funds regimes outside Europe in return for violent border control on the EU’s behalf. This threatens migrant and refugee lives, whilst risking putting Europe at the mercy of violent authoritarians and eroding its moral leadership on the rule of law. 
• Increasing both EU and member state overreach in mass surveillance and policing; including through tripling the size of EU border agency Frontex, whose disgraced former director Fabrice Leggeri  is now an MEP for France’s far-right National Rally. 
• Increasing deals with countries outside the EU to process claims for protection in breach of international law.

Most Europeans did not support the far-right. But further concessions to the far-right, as signalled by Austria’s Chancellor, risks further electoral costs to mainstream parties. Tougher migration legislation (like that adopted in France and Germany), proposals by some Scandinavian governments (Sweden and Finland) to report undocumented migrants, as well as the EU Migration Pact, have all failed to stop the rise of the far-right, and may even fuel it. Research published earlier this year has also demonstrated the costs of concession for social democrats. 

Quotes

Michele Levoy, Director of PICUM: 

“Werefuse to accept a cynical EU that undermines its own values and interests by funding regimes that harm people seeking safety and opportunity and takes resources away from social investment and pours them into border management.”

“Together we must join forces for a compassionate Europe that addresses the many genuine emergencies we face collectively, from deepening inequalities to a looming climate disaster. It is time for all of us across the continent to direct our energies towards building a society we all can live and thrive in.”

Giulia Messmer, spokesperson for Sea-Watch (search and rescue NGO):

“European migration politics is already more right-wing than it has ever been. The individual right to asylum is effectively abolished and human rights violations at the external borders are a legalized system.” 

“The new EU Parliament will capitalize on this and have unseen opportunities to deprive people on the move of their rights. If liberal parties such as the Social Democrats do not want to be mere stooges for the new European fascism, right now is the time for a change of course.”

Isabelle Chopin, Director of the Migration Policy Group:

“The new reality of a stronger presence of far-right forces in the EP means noticeable threats towards advancing policies of inclusion and respect for human rights.”

“The new European Parliament must reiterate its commitment to the fundamental values and principles of equality and non-discrimination and ensure they are given a central place in the work programme of the new European Commission.”

Tineke Strik, MEP:

“The rise of the far-right in Europe means the democratic majority in the European Parliament must come together even stronger in defence of our Union’s fundamental values. The far-right’s playbook of scapegoating minorities, portraying asylum seekers as threats, and cracking down on institutions meant to uphold the Rule of Law is an existential threat to everything the EU stands for. This election outcome requires extra vigilance from all EU institutions. It is key to keep the pressure on the centre right parties not to open the door to the far right, and to give true meaning to the European values. The Parliament must at the same time increase the pressure on a new Commission to prioritise upholding the Rule of Law and fundamental rights and hold Member States accountable. Simultaneously, the Council must form a united front against these rising anti-EU tendencies and the European Parliament’s function of scrutinizing the Commission and defending the democratic voice of EU citizens will become ever-more important. I am personally more determined than ever to continue the fight back against this tide; to do everything in my power to ensure that Europe is a safe, dignified, fundamental-rights-compliant and inclusive home to us all.”

Ysé El Bouhali Bouchet, International Migration Officer at CCFD-Terre Solidaire:

“In 2023 alone, over 110 persons died or went missing in the desert between Tunisia and Libya as a result of the externalisation policies conducted by the EU and its member States. These policies, increasingly adopted with various third countries, pose a direct threat to the human rights of people on the move.
More than ever, it is essential that the new European Parliament fulfill its role in safeguarding the fundamental freedoms and human rights, in particular in the field of international migration cooperation.”

Electoral gains for European far-right parties risk leading to even more human rights violations at the EU’s borders and across Europe, against migrants and racialised people.

The leading European People’s Party look set to continue an approach which has undermined human rights and international law, cost lives, and repeatedly failed in its stated aims. Meanwhile, an increased presence in the European Parliament from far-right groups like the European Conservatives and Reformists and Identity and Democracy will create a powerful lobbying presence for the even more hostile migration policies presented in their manifestos. The main risks include:

A foreign policy that threatens refugee and migrant lives while undermining European security

• The EU looks set to strike more deals with third countries to prevent people from reaching Europe; increasingly also tied to development aid and resource access, thereby distorting European foreign policy aims.
• The EU already struck such deals with Turkey in 2015, with Libya in 2017, with Tunisia in 2023, and with Egypt and Lebanon this very year. 
• This model of pouring millions into third countries, including authoritarian regimes, so they keep people out of Europe, has been proven harmful and lethal time and again – most notably through EU assistance to the Libyan “Coast Guard.” 
• A recent media investigation has revealed how EU funds channelled through these deals are being used by third countries to round up Black migrants across North Africa and dump them in the desert with no aid. The investigation reveals that such operations had been known in Brussels for years.

A border policy that undermines human rights in Europe and paves the way for surveillance and overreach in policing. 

• The EPP promised to triple Frontex staff and increase the agency’s budget and powers (it is already the EU’s largest.) This is despite little evidence of institutional change since the agency was accused of serious rights violations by the EU anti-corruption watchdog OLAF, and found complicit in human rights violations in the Mediterranean by international NGO Human Rights Watch. 
• Former Frontex Director Fabrice Leggeri, who resigned after allegations of misconduct from EU anti-fraud agency OLAF, has been elected as an MEP for French far-right party National Rally.
• This follows the sweeping package of rights infringements contained within the New Pact on Migration and Asylum agreed earlier this year.

Increasing deportations to danger

• Right-wing parties across Europe are looking at ramping up deportations of people seeking asylum to supposedly “safe” third countries for the processing of their asylum claim, and for hosting those who would be granted asylum. This would mean more agreements like the UK-Rwanda deal, which has been much criticised by the UN and national institutions and civil society for violating international law and exposing people to abuse and human rights violations. And it would validate and generalise agreements like the one between Italy and Albania, which would see Italy transfer people rescued at sea to the Balkan country with no guarantees against abuses in the new detention centres.

A full overview of what EU parties’ manifestos say about migration can be found here.

On 10 April 2024, the European Parliament adopted the New Pact on Migration and Asylum, a package of reforms expanding the criminalisation and digital surveillance of migrants. 

Despite civil society organisations’ repeated warnings, the Pact “will normalise the arbitrary use of immigration detention, including for children and families, increase racial profiling, use ‘crisis’ procedures to enable pushbacks, and return individuals to so called ‘safe third countries’ where they are at risk of violence, torture, and arbitrary imprisonment”.

The New Pact on Migration and Asylum ushers in a deadly new era of digital surveillance, expanding the digital infrastructure for an EU border regime based on the criminalisation and punishment of migrants and racialised people. 

This statement outlines how the Migration Pact framework will enable and in some cases mandate the deployment of harmful surveillance technologies and practices against migrants. We also highlight some grey zones where the Pact leaves open the possibility for further harmful developments involving intrusive and violent surveillance and data processing practices in the future. 

Migration Pact enables the digital surveillance of migrants 

As more intrusive technology will be deployed at borders and in detention centres,  people’s personal data will be collected in bulk and exchanged between police forces across the EU, and biometric identification systems will be used to track people’s movements and increase policing of undocumented migrants. The New Pact on Migration will mandate a whole range of technological systems to identify, filter, track, assess and control people entering or already in Europe. 

These systems will reinforce an already cruel status quo. European policymakers have opted for years to treat the movement of people into Europe mainly as a security issue. The result is very limited safe and regular pathways to come to Europe, the widespread criminalisation of many who make the journey, and systematic exploitation and discrimination against those already living here. Investing in technology to serve this already harmful system will mainly benefit the tech and security firms who reap the financial rewards of this agenda – while pushing people into more dangerous routes and giving more licence for racial profiling at our borders and in our communities. 

Here are the main ways the Migration Pact creates a dangerous system of migrant surveillance:

• Migrants as suspects: A vast regime of digital monitoring

The Migration Pact expands a wide system of data collection and automatic exchange, leading to a regime of mass surveillance of migrants. The  changes in the Eurodac Regulation will mandate the systematic collection of migrants’ biometric data (now also including facial images), which will be retained in massive databases up to 10 years, exchanged at every step of the migration process and made accessible to police forces across the European Union for tracking and identity checks purposes. The minimum age for data collection was lowered from fourteen to six, with the possibility to use coercion should ‘child friendly’ methods fail.

Further, newly created screening procedures and border procedures (Screening Regulation) will mandate various security checks and assessments of all people entering Europe irregularly, including to seek asylum, with a potential for automated and AI-based decision making. These procedures will require the personal and biometric data of every person who enters the EU to be cross-checked against multiple national and European policing and immigration databases, as well as systems operated by Europol and Interpol, increasing the possibility of transnational repression of human rights defenders. People identified as posing a “risk to national security or public order” will be pushed into accelerated border procedures with fewer safeguards for the processing of the asylum application (Asylum Procedures Regulation and Return Border Procedure Regulation). Not only are concepts of national security and public order dangerously vague and undefined terms leaving wide discretion for Member States, they also pave the way for potentially discriminatory practices in screening procedures, using nationality as a proxy for race and ethnicity in these assessments. Further, even families with children and unaccompanied children could be held in border procedures, with a high risk of being de facto detained.

In the context of asylum procedures, the Pact will enable intrusive technological practices in various stages of asylum processing. The Asylum Procedures Regulation provides for increased searches of personal items, paving the way for invasive practices like the extraction of mobile phone data, which involves seizing and mining personal electronic devices (such as phone or laptop) to extract data that may be used to find evidence to  assess the truthfulness of their claims (for instance, in an asylum proceeding) or check their identity, age or country of origin. Such invasive practices have been successfully challenged in Germany and in the UK but continue to be used in several European countries. Moreover, the Asylum Procedures Regulation also allows for the use of remote interviews and videoconferencing for people in detention and during the appeal procedure. This not only raises privacy and data protection concerns, it heightens the isolation of people who are already in a vulnerable situation and risks negatively affecting the quality and the fairness of the procedures.

• Technological management of prison facilities for migrants

The newly introduced screening and border procedures will lead to more people, including children and families, being held in prison-like detention facilities modelled on the “Closed Controlled Access Centres” already operating in Greece. These centres are characterised by motion-sensors, cameras and fingerprint-access, modelling a system of digital management of immigration facilities that relies on high-tech surveillance to monitor and control people.  Under the Pact, a minimum of 30,000 people are expected to be in “border procedures” at any one time, likely involving  detention or restrictions on movement. Far from treating detention as a “last resort”, chillingly, the Pact foresees the expansion of detention across Europe. 

• Tech-enabled racial profiling at the EU’s internal borders 

Alongside the Migration Pact are other legislative changes to EU migration policy. The Schengen Borders Code Reform, set to be adopted on 24 April 2024, will generalise police checks for the purpose of immigration enforcement, facilitating the practice of racial profiling within EU territory.

This new law encourages the increased use of surveillance and monitoring technologies at both internal and external borders. Technologies such as drones, motion sensors, thermal imaging cameras, and others are used for the identification of people crossing borders prior to arrival and have been shown to facilitate pushbacks. 

Opening the door to future expansion of the border surveillance complex 

The Migration Pact sits upon existing frameworks governing the use of digital surveillance in migration. The EU Artificial Intelligence Act introduces a lenient framework for the use of AI by law enforcement, migration control and national security agencies, provides loopholes and even encourages the use of dangerous surveillance systems on the most marginalised in society. 

In this framework, combined with the Migration Pact and new existing developments in surveillance technology, we can expect:

• Automated profiling and risk assessments for security and vulnerability checks in order to allegedly facilitate decisions related to asylum procedures, security assessments, detention, and deportation of migrants. The Pact alludes to numerous instances in which AI-based decision making may be used, such as during the screening procedure to assess if someone represents a “national security risk” or a threat to the “public security”, or to assess the level of vulnerability of an asylum applicant. Not only may this lead to numerous violations of data protection obligations and infringements of privacy, but by nature violate the right to non-discrimination in the insofar as they codify assumptions about the link between personal data and characteristics with particular risks. The introduction of automated assessment in asylum procedures will mean fewer protections and safeguards, and further divergence from a principle of case-by-case, individualised and needs- based assessments in the access to international protection. 
• The use of forecasting tools that build on biassed statistical data collected on irregular entries and asylum applications to attempt to predict large-scale movements of people, and that can be used to inform actions on the ground to deter or interdict those movements. A similar tool has been tested in the Horizon 2020 project ITFlows. 
• Lie-detectors that claim to tell if someone is being truthful by analysing facial movements, which are dangerous and unreliable enough to be banned under the EU’s AI Act – except in the border and policing contexts.
• Dialect recognition systems and other intrusive technologies used in the context of asylum or visa applications, to assess the veracity of applicants’ claims. This technology, in addition to reinforcing a generalised framework of suspicion towards people seeking asylum, is based on unscientific and often biassed, discriminatory assumptions that inform real-world decisions that have a huge and detrimental impact on people’s lives.
• Border surveillance technologies such as remote biometric identification in border areas, drones and thermal cameras to prevent border crossings into and within the European Union. While some surveillance technologies are already in use, a wide range of systems are heavily tested in EU-funded projects like FOLDOUT Solution, ROBORDER, BorderUAS, Nestor. Their use at internal borders is encouraged by the Schengen Borders Code. 

What’s next?

In its final version, the Pact represents the further embedding of surveillance technologies in the EU, and beyond, as an increasingly key part of its arsenal to sustain Fortress Europe. It therefore represents a further erosion of fundamental rights, and the normalisation of digital surveillance at, and within, borders, justified by an approach to migration policy based on repression rather than rights.  

As the #ProtectNotSurveil coalition, we will continue to challenge the use of digital technologies at different levels of EU policies and practice and advocate for the ability of people to move and to seek safety and opportunity without risking harm, surveillance or discrimination. The coalition will release a more detailed analysis of the digital impacts of the Migration Pact in due course. 

To learn more about the coalition’s work or join our efforts to challenge digital policing in migration, get in touch: info@protectnotsurveil.eu

The #ProtectNotSurveil coalition

Access Now, Equinox Initiative for Racial Justice, European Digital Rights (EDRi), Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM), Refugee Law Lab, AlgorithmWatch, Amnesty International, Border Violence Monitoring Network (BVMN), EuroMed Rights, European Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ECNL), European Network Against Racism (ENAR), Homo Digitalis, Privacy International, Statewatch, Dr Derya Ozkul, Dr. Jan Tobias Muehlberg, and  Dr Niovi Vavoula.

In a final plenary vote on April 10, the European Parliament sealed a Migration Pact that will likely lead to widespread human rights violations across Europe and at its borders.

Among potential harms, this would mean that:

• Any person coming to Europe without valid travel documents will likely be detained in border facilities, without exceptions regarding age, including families with babies.
• People who are considered not eligible for asylum will risk being directly channelled into deportation procedures, disregarding other existing national avenues for people to stay in Europe, from medical permits to family reunification.
• People will not have any effective legal representation while they undergo administrative procedures at borders. People who appeal their deportation order can be deported while waiting for a decision on their case.
• Racialised communities living in the EU (including EU citizens) will be increasingly profiled as screening procedures are rolled out to identify people who have, at a certain point, entered irregularly across the bloc.
• Member states will be able to derogate from key safeguards when they claim a third country is pushing people to their borders (which the Pact calls “instrumentalisation of migration”).

Our concerns are echoed by international and national human rights organisations across Europe in previous joint statements calling on EU lawmakers to vote down this Pact.

Michele LeVoy, Director of the Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM), said: “People move. They always have and always will. We need routes for people to move and settle in safety and dignity. But under the EU Migration Pact people will undoubtedly experience even more violence and pushbacks in their migration journey and at borders.”

Charities on both sides of the English Channel have hit out at the new cooperation agreement between EU border agency Frontex and UK authorities signed in London today between UK officials and EU Home Affairs Commissioner Ylva Johansson; citing human rights scandals surrounding both organisations and an enforcement approach that is “flawed from conception.” 

• The “integrated border management” between countries described in today’s deal has had serious consequences. Frontex was recently found to be systematically sharing the coordinates of Mediterranean boats in distress with militias and pirates that return people crossing to conditions of abuse and violence. 
• This news came over a year on from the forced resignation of its former director (now a European Parliament candidate for the French far-right National Rally) over the agency’s complicity and cover-ups in Greece’s deadly border campaign, which was supposed to herald a culture change. 
• The number of UK border drownings has doubled in the past year, which rescue NGO Alarmphone says is linked to Anglo-French border policy. UK and French authorities have faced allegations of serious shortcomings in responding to Channel shipwrecks. 
• Meanwhile the UK continues to attempt to undermine its own courts and international refugee law with its plans to outsource its asylum processes to Rwanda, and its abuse-ridden detention estate is widely documented.

Quotes from organisations responding to the move can be found below. 

Michele LeVoy, Director of the Brussels-based Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM), said:

“Frontex is signing this new agreement with the UK border forces after countless reports of complicity by the EU agency in serious violence.”

“The plan is flawed from conception. Tougher enforcement does not reduce irregular crossings; it only makes people’s journeys more dangerous. These resources should instead be used to provide safe routes and proper support for people seeking safety.”

Mary Atkinson, Campaigns and Networks Manager at the London-based Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants, said:

“People move – they always have and always will. It’s something we should welcome, not something which needs to be ‘tackled’ or ‘cracked down’ upon. We urgently need change so that people can move without risking – and too often losing – their lives.

“This latest development is just more of the same tired old thinking. Making our borders more violent has never stopped those in need from coming here and all these measures will do is make it more dangerous. The government needs to wake up and accept that ‘deterrents’ never have – and never will – work. Instead, we need to listen to the evidence and develop policies that prioritise people’s safety and human rights.”

A spokesperson for Calais-based Human Rights Observers said: 

“Frontex, the EU’s biggest agency, which squanders European taxpayers’ money by massively violating human rights, is preparing to land on the French-British border. With at least 28 people killed by the murderous border policies of France and the UK in 2023, the presence of Frontex would only increase the insecurity of people seeking protection.” 

Josephine Valeske at Europe-wide campaign Abolish Frontex said:

“UK border policy has seen deaths by drowning double in the last year, and its government continues to insist on violating both UK and international law by deporting people seeking asylum to Rwanda.” 

“Frontex claims to have made progress on rights – but joining the UK for its new so-called “crackdown” on migration shows that nothing has changed. The EU cannot claim to defend human rights while Frontex continues to exist, and expand a European axis of abuse, at our expense.” 

Amidst warnings from over 50 Civil Society Organisations, EU lawmakers reached a political agreement on the EU’s New Pact on Migration and Asylum in December. The agreement is a continuation of a decade of policy that has led to the proliferation of rights violations in Europe. Moreover, it will have devastating implications for the right to international protection in the bloc and greenlights abuses across Europe including racial profiling, default de facto detention and pushbacks. Next week, MEPs will be presented with a final chance to reject the files in a Plenary vote, and to give a political signal against the adoption of a Pact that would undermine fundamental rights.

Taken together, the Regulations will usher in a new system for ‘managing migration’ in the EU that is characterised by:

• De facto detention at borders with no exemption for families with children of all ages, accelerated, substandard procedures to assess asylum claims rather than full and fair assessments, and an emphasis on return procedures with lowered safeguards.
• Far more asylum applicants will end up in border procedures and, through the ‘legal fiction of non-entry’, will not be considered as on EU territory, which would lead to lower safeguards and heightens the risk of human rights violations and pushbacks at borders. Even unaccompanied children can be subjected to border procedures and held in de facto detention when state authorities consider them a ‘danger to national security or public order’. Moreover, experience has shown that confining large numbers of people in border areas for prolonged periods leads to chronic overcrowding and inhumane conditions, as witnessed on the Aegean islands.
• Through the broadening of the ‘safe third country’ principle, people asking for asylum will be declared inadmissible and increasingly deported to countries outside of the EU on the basis of a widely-defined connection with those countries, heightening the risk of refoulement.  In the past, this has manifested in failed agreements like the EU-Turkey deal, externalising the processing of asylum claims to third countries.
• In the absence of safe and regular pathways, people seeking safety or livelihoods are forced to take ever more dangerous routes, resulting in 2023 being the deadliest year on record since 2015. In the Mediterranean alone, more than 2,500 individuals were reported as dead or disappeared last year, a figure that is only the tip of the iceberg. The Pact fails to address this, and instead continues to reinforce Fortress Europe.
• An increase in the use of surveillance technologies at all stages of migration and asylum procedures. The Pact represents a step further into the mass surveillance of migrants and racialised people, as more intrusive technology will be deployed at borders and in detention centres, people’s personal data will be collected in bulk and exchanged between police forces across the EU, or biometric identification systems will be used to track people’s movements and increase policing of undocumented migrants. 

Civil society and human rights watchdogs have consistently reported on systematic violations of the fundamental rights of people seeking safety or livelihood, particularly racialised communities by denying them access to shelter, services, and asylum and resorting to pushbacks en masse. All this, whilst pursuing policies that seek to criminalise efforts to help refugees and migrants, and even movement at large, which contributes to a shrinking civic space. The Commission put forth the New Pact as a ‘solution’ for uneven standards in the implementation of a Common European Asylum System across Member States. Yet, the Pact does nothing to remedy this nor support Member States receiving large numbers of arrivals at the external borders. The ‘first country of entry’ principle remains and there will be no mandatory relocation of people saved through Search and Rescue missions – an initiative that could have provided humane and sustainable solutions through the proportionate distribution of asylum applicants throughout Europe. Instead, Member States without external EU borders can avoid responsibility-sharing by financing border fortification and immigration detention facilities in border Member States or by funding dubious ‘projects’ in non-EU countries.

The negotiations were rushed towards closure by the European Commission and the Spanish and Belgian Presidencies of the Council, leading to more than 48 hours of marathon trilogue negotiations and the abandonment of the last minimal safeguards that had been upheld by the Parliament. What remains is an extremely complex legislative framework that does not provide any effective solution to the migration management issues raised over the past years, and fails to keep people safe. The agreement, at its core, replicates every principle of the Council’s negotiating mandate.

We, the undersigned, call on MEPs to reject the Pact in the Plenary vote. It creates a system whereby the right to seek asylum in the EU is severely threatened and will engender a proliferation of human rights violations against people across Europe due to their migration status.

Signing Organisations:

• A World of Neighbours
• A.S.G.I. (Associazione per gli Studi Giuridici sull’Immigrazione)
• Abolish FronteX
• Access Now
• ActionAid International
• aditus foundation
• African Children and Youth Development Network (ACYDN)
• AiA-Alternative Informatics Association
• Alboan
• AMERA International
• Amnesty International
• Andalucía Acoge
• ARCI
• Association for Legal Information (SIP)
• Association promotion droits humains (Migration et droit)
• Associazione ricreativa e culturale italiana (ARCI)
• Avocats Sans Frontières
• Be Aware And Share (BAAS)
• Better Days Greece
• Birlikte Yaşamak İstiyoruz İnisiyatifi (We Want to Live Together İnitiative) / Türkiye (Turkey)
• Bits of Freedom
• Boat Refugee Foundation
• Border Violence Monitoring Network (BVMN)
• Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS)
• Center for Legal Aid – Voice in Bulgaria
• Centre for Peace Studies
• Changemakers Lab
• Churches´Commission for Migrants in Europe (CCME)
• CILD
• CIRÉ asbl
• CNCD-11.11.11
• Colectivo Indignado
• Colectivos en lucha Extremadura
• Collective Aid
• Comisión Española de Ayuda al Refugiado (CEAR)
• Community Peacemaker Solidarity – Aegean Migrant Solidarity
• CONVIVE – Fundación Cepaim
• Coordinadora Obrim Fronteres
• Diotima – Centre for Gender Rights and Equality
• Dråpen i Havet / Stagona
• Draseis sti Geitonia
• E.L. Foundation
• ECCHR – European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights
• ECHO100PLUS
• EmpowerVan
• Entreculturas
• Epicenter.Works
• Equal Legal Aid
• Equinox Initiative for Racial Justice
• Equipo Decenio Afrodescendiente- Spain
• EuroMed Rights
• European Alternatives
• European Anti-Poverty Network (EAPN)
• European Civic Forum
• European Digital Rights (EDRi)
• European Network Against Racism
• European Sex Workers’ Rights Alliance
• Extinction rebellion Málaga
• Federation of protestant churches in Italy (FCEI)
• Fédérations des tunisiens citoyens des deux rives (FTCR)
• Fenix Humanitarian Legal Aid
• Flucht, interkulturelle Arbeit, Migration, Diakonie Hessen,
• forRefugees
• From the Sea to the City
• Fundación para la Innovación, Investigación, Formación y el Desarrollo Comunitario (FÜNDEC)
• Geloof & Samenleving
• Global Peace and Development Organization
• Greek Council for Refugees (GCR)
• Greek Forum of Migrants
• Grenzenlose Wärme – Refugee Relief Work e.V.
• Groupe d’information et de soutien des immigré⋅es (GISTI)
• Grupa Granica
• Hermes Center
• HIAS Europe
• Homo Digitalis
• Hope Cafe Athens
• Human Rights Legal Project
• Human Rights Watch
• HumanRights360
• Humans in the Loop Foundation
• I Have Rights
• Infokolpa
• Instance Nationale de Protection des Biens Publics et de la Transparence au Maroc “INPBPTM”
• Institute Circle
• Inter Alia
• International Rescue Committee
• Irídia-Center for the defense of human rights
• Italy Must Act
• Jesuit Refugee Service Greece (JRS)
• JRS Europe
• JRS Malta (Jesuit Refugee Service)
• Kerk in Actie
• KISA Cyprus
• Klikaktiv
• La Cimade
• LDH (Ligue des droits de l’Homme)
• Legal Centre Lesvos
• Legis
• Lesvos Solidarity (LESOL)
• Lighthouse Relief
• Ligue des droits humains
• Maldusa project
• Médecins sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders
• medico international
• Migrant Voice
• Migration Consortium
• Migration Policy group (MPG)
• Migreurop
• Mobile Info Team
• Movimiento por la Paz (MPDL)
• Mugak Zabalduz
• Mv Louise Michel
• Network for Children’s Rights (Greece)
• No Name Kitchen
• No One is Illegal
• Northern Lights Aid
• Novact
• Ongi Etorri Errefuxiatuak
• Oxfam
• Pan African Alliance on Climate Change
• Peace Institute (Mirovni inštitut)
• Plataforma Ciudadana Caudete se Mueve
• Politiscope
• Privacy International
• PRO ASYL
• Project Armonia
• Project ELPIDA e.V.
• Quaker Council for European Affairs
• r42 – Sail And Rescue
• Reachout Foundation
• Red Acoge
• Red SOS Refugiados Europa
• Red Umbrella Sweden
• ReFOCUS Media Labs
• Refugee Legal Support (RLS)
• Refugees Welcome Italia
• RESQSHIP e.V.
• Salud por Derecho
• Salvamento Marítimo Humanitario
• Samos Volunteers
• Save the Children
• Sea-Eye e.V
• Sea-Watch
• Second Tree
• Seebrücke
• Servicio Jesuita a Migrantes – SJM
• Sienos Grupė (Lithuania)
• SOLIDAR
• SOS Balkanroute
• SOS Humanity
• Statewatch
• Stichting LOS
• Still I Rise
• Stop Border Violence
• The European region of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA-Europe)
• United Hands for Refugees e.V.
• United4Rescue – Gemeinsam retten e.V.
• Velos youth
• Walk of Shame
• Watch the Med Alarm-phone
• We Gaan Ze Halen (Let’s Bring Them Here)
• WissenschaftlerInnen für den Frieden Deutscland (Academics for Peace in Germany)
• Yoga and Sport with Refugees

This statement was first circulated in February 2024, when it gathered 81 signatures. It was then re-circulated in April 2024, gathering a total of 163 signatures.

EU lawmakers have reached a political agreement on the revision of the Schengen Borders Code that would de facto legitimise racial profiling in border checks.

The reform of the Schengen Borders Code aims at reducing the amount of temporary generalised internal EU border checks. However, it would escalate checks on specific groups of people. In particular, the deal would allow police authorities in joint patrols to carry out “random” document checks near internal EU borders with the aim of apprehending people without valid travel or residence documents. Research has already shown that police tend to stop people for checks based on racial, ethnic, or religious characteristics. It is clear that these checks will depend on police’s decisions about who “looks like” a person without valid papers.

Silvia Carta, Advocacy Officer at PICUM, said: “This agreement embraces a very harmful narrative which assumes that people crossing borders without valid documents are a threat to the EU and proposes to address it by increasing policing, while de facto encouraging racial profiling”.

The deal would also legalise the violent practice of ‘internal pushbacks’, which consists in apprehending and detaining people caught without a valid document near an internal border, and transferring them to the member state the police think the person came from without conducting an individual assessment. It is still unclear which ‘safeguards’ have been introduced to protect children, who are not explicitly excluded from such transfer procedures.

The deal would most likely escalate the use of monitoring and surveillance technologies that do not apply relevant safeguards and would be at odds with existing EU data protection legislation and fundamental rights.

Lastly, the deal would also allow internal checks and increased policing in situations of so-called “instrumentalisation of migration”, that is when a member state claims that a non-EU country or ‘hostile non state actor’ is pushing migrants towards external EU borders for political reasons. This is an extremely problematic concept, whose codification into EU law would introduce broad derogations to fundamental rights, including the right to asylum and freedom of movement.

An open letter to negotiators in the European Commission, the Spanish Presidency of the Council of the European Union, and the European Parliament ahead of the final negotiations on the EU Pact on Migration

We are writing as concerned human rights defenders, and as people who see and work with the stark consequences of political choices.

The EU Pact on Migration and Asylum will mirror the failed approaches of the past and worsen their consequences. There is currently a major risk that the Pact results in an ill-functioning, costly, and cruel system that falls apart on implementation and leaves critical issues unaddressed. 

If adopted in its current format, it will normalise the arbitrary use of immigration detention, including for children and families, increase racial profiling, use “crisis” procedures to enable pushbacks, and return individuals to so called “safe third countries” where they  are at risk of violence, torture, and arbitrary imprisonment.

It also betrays the spirit of existing EU work, such as the EU Action Plan on Integration and the EU Action Plan Against Racism which recognises the intersectional impacts of racism and the specific vulnerability of migrants and refugees. The Pact, as it stands, risks perpetuating discriminatory practices within the very structures meant to uphold justice and protection for all. 

We are acutely aware that politics is often about compromise. But there are exceptions, and human rights cannot be compromised. When they are weakened, there are consequences for all of us.  

Rather than channelling funding towards more camps, walls, and surveillance, resources should go towards providing effective solutions, based on protection and assistance, of the kind offered to people fleeing Ukraine. Europe’s solidarity and commitment to human rights cannot be defined by place of origin, race, ethnicity, or immigration status.

We should strengthen, not weaken, our reception and asylum systems and provide mechanisms to fairly share responsibility between European states. We need support for – not restrictions on – rescuing people at sea. We need more, not less, access to legal aid, asylum, medical and social support for people in need. We need real accountability for  border forces that violate our laws. And we need more safe routes for people to move, work and settle in safety and dignity. 

We have recently witnessed a dignified and compassionate response to displacement with the activation of the Temporary Protection Directive. This stands as a testament to the principles of human rights and protection that should guide our collective approach to these reforms. The New Pact must reflect and build upon this dignified response rather than leading Europe in the opposite direction.

There are times when political choices can make a profound difference, for better or for worse, to people’s lives. Today is one such time. We’re asking you to show leadership for the just and compassionate Europe we all want to live in.

Sincerely,

• ActionAid International
• Amnesty International
• Association for Juridical Studies on Immigration (ASGI)
• Balkanbrücke
• Be Aware And Share (BAAS)
• Birlikte Yaşamak İstiyoruz İnisiyatifi / We Want to Live Together Initiative
• The Border Violence Monitoring Network (BVMN)
• Caritas Europa
• Centre for Legal Aid “Voice in Bulgaria“
• Civil initiative Infokolpa
• CNCD – 11.11.11.
• Collective Aid
• Churches´ Commission for Migrants in Europe (CCME)
• Divest Borders
• Dokustelle
• Equal Legal Aid
• Equinox Initiative for Racial Justice
• EuroMed Rights
• Europe Cares
• European Anti-Poverty Network (EAPN)
• European Lawyers for Democracy and Human Rights (ELDH)
• European Network Against Racism (ENAR)
• European Network on Religion and Belief (ENORB)
• Generation for Change CY
• Greek Forum of Migrants (GFM)
• Grenzenlose Wärme – Refugee Relief Work e.V.
• Habibi.Works (Soup and Socks, e.V.)
• I Have Rights
• Intereuropean Human Aid Association Germany e.V.
• International Rescue Committee
• Ivorian Community of Greece
• JRS Europe
• KISA – Action for Equality, Support, Antiracism
• La Cimade
• Legal Centre Lesvos
• Ligue des Droits de l’Homme (LDH)
• Love Without Borders
• Media and Migration Association (MMA)
• Mobile Info Team
• NLA (Northern Lights Aid)
• Oxfam
• Pikett Asyl
• Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM)
• ReFOCUS Media Labs
• Refugee Legal Support (RLS)
• Refugees in Libya
• Revibra Europe
• Samos Volunteers
• Save the Children
• SIEMPRE Belgium
• SOLIDAR
• S.P.E.A.K (Muslim Women Collective NL)
• Voices of International Students (VOIS Cyprus)
• Women’s Healthcare on the Move
• Yoga and Sport with Refugees

European legislators are considering new policies that could see children as young as six subjected to immigration detention and accelerated border procedures, multiple sources close to negotiations have said. Human rights organisations including Save the Children, PICUM, EuroMed Rights and Border Violence Monitoring Network have strongly criticised the proposals. The revelations were made by negotiators representing the Spanish Presidency of the EU Council during trilogues on Tuesday 5 December. 

This would mark a dramatic break with current proposals, which already allowed for children from the age of twelve to be placed in border procedures, and follow linked plans to fingerprint children aged six and over through Eurodac. The original proposal already failed to comply with the internationally recognised definition of children, which does not allow any discrimination between persons under eighteen in the enjoyment of their fundamental rights and procedural guarantees.

It comes as a paper leaked on Wednesday night revealed a no-compromises mood from the Spanish Presidency as it revealed its position on the controversial New Pact on Migration and Asylum. The Presidency hopes to seal political deals on the Pact by Christmas. 

The new document: 

• Resolves to ignore parliamentary and human rights monitors’ concerns about widespread racial profiling and screening across the EU (not just at borders). The leaked paper states: “Despite the Parliament’s strong opposition, mainly due to concerns on potential discrimination based on race, the Presidency remains firm on maintaining this provision that is a strong priority for the Council.”
• Resolves to preserve a principle called the “legal fiction of non-entry”, whereby individuals who set foot in a processing facility– which can be anywhere in the EU – aren’t automatically regarded as being on EU soil, even though they technically are, because their presence has not been authorised. This allows the lowering of standards, such as more swift border procedures. 
• Preserved the principle of accepting relocated refugees and providing funding to third countries for border externalisation as measures “of equal value.”

Legislators and civil society organisations say that the effects of these policies, combined with proposals being discussed on the immigration detention of children, would give a green light to six-year olds being detained and deported into danger, and continue to call for an unconditional exclusion of children from border procedures.

Willy Bergogné, Europe Director at Save the Children, said: 

“European leaders are debating the age at which children should be locked up at EU borders. Their alleged crime: seeking protection in a region that prides itself on exporting human rights to the world. Europe should stand as a haven, protecting and welcoming children instead of detaining and deporting them.”

“Our asylum system must work to safeguard children with a Migration Pact that ensures, not threatens, children’s rights. This means no child detention or deportation, swift family reunions, and all migration decisions made in children’s best interests.”

Michele LeVoy, Director of the Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM), said:

“The new move to detain and deport children as young as six is the product of a series of rushed last-minute deals. This is a low blow to internationally-recognised child rights which stipulate that no child should be put in immigration detention. Countries around the world have made a commitment to work towards ending immigration detention of children. This cannot be how Europe is governed.”

Hope Barker, Senior Policy Analyst at Border Violence Monitoring Network, said: 

“This new dystopian proposal to lock up six year olds, announced at the eleventh hour, is the iceberg tip of a humanitarian disaster.”

“The New Pact strips down rights and liberties for people across Europe regardless of their migration status. It’s ill-considered, won’t work, and flies in the face of Europe’s professed values. Negotiators should take it back to the drawing board.”