| Description |
The “hotspot approach” has been envisaged as a model of operational support by the EU agencies to Member States faced with
disproportionate migratory pressure, with the aim to help them swiftly identify, register and fingerprint migrants, support the
implementation of relocation and returns.
One year since the first hotspots were set up, and half a year since the entry into force of the EU-Turkey Statement of March 2016, this
study analyses the legal framework and practices developed in Italy and Greece, the role of the different actors involved and the
challenges that have emerged. The key question throughout the study is whether and how implementation is in line with EU asylum law
and legal standards and whether it ensures that the fundamental rights of the migrants and refugees are respected.
The hotspots, as implemented today, are a pilot model of a more permanent registration and identification mechanism at the points of
arrival that selects between those seeking asylum and those to be returned. Yet, the hotspots currently apply certain practices and
standards that are either inadequate or contrary to the EU asylum and immigration acquis. As this is a hybrid EU-Member States tool,
responsibility for human rights protection and safeguards relates to both levels.
In terms of accessing the asylum procedure, the research shows that, while for some individuals this may have been the case, for many
others it was not; many newly arrived migrants have been trapped in prolonged detention without access to asylum, have not received the
right information in order to do so, or have been swiftly returned as a result of the hotspots approach.
The hotspots have certainly not helped in relieving the pressure from Italy and Greece as was their stated objective: instead, they have
led to an increase in the number of asylum applicants waiting in Italy and Greece, consolidating the challenges and shortcomings already
inherent in the Dublin system. The hotspots approach has also led to more repressive measures, often disrespecting fundamental rights,
which are applied by national authorities as a result of EU pressure to control the arrivals; yet despite EU pressure, it is the Member States
that are held ultimately responsible for this implementation. The implementation of the EU-Turkey deal is a prime example of this EU
pressure shifting responsibilities to the national level.
The implementation of the hotspots approach should be understood in relation to the broader reform of the CEAS, and an overarching
strategy to end irregular migration flows into the EU. The aim of the study is to contribute to current debates, by highlighting the
challenges that emerge through the function of the hotspots at national level, the role of EU agencies and the level of EU responsibility in
the absence of an EU mechanism for responsibility sharing. Ultimately, if the hotspots are to be consolidated as a permanent referral
mechanism and the points of entry, a number of elements need to be in place to ensure that this is compatible with the EU acquis and legal
standards.
|