Asylum in the EU: Presidency "non-paper" calls for scrapping relocation in favour of "tailored solidarity contribution"

A "non-paper" on EU asylum policy drafted by the Slovakian Presidency of the Council suggests that Member States should be able to decline relocating asylum-seekers in favour of a "tailored solidarity contribution" such as "financial contributions to the Member State under pressure," contributions of asylum staff and border guards, and support with returns operations.


See: Slovakian Presidency: Effective Solidarity: a way forward on Dublin revision (pdf)

The paper essentially promotes the views of the Visegrad Group of states (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia), who have largely opposed the EU relocation scheme that is supposed to transfer asylum applicants from Greece and Italy to other EU Member States. Given that the relocation scheme has essentially failed, the views put forth by the Slovakian Presidency may gain more traction than previously.

The "non-paper" says:

"2) A tailored solidarity contribution mechanism for deteriorating circumstances Where Member States' asylum systems are put under strain due to high numbers of arrivals, a solidarity component needs to complement the upgraded system. All Member States should take part in a form or another to this collective effort. A structured system needs to be put in place for that purpose, with predictable, fair and objective targets (trigger and ceiling). Most often, relieving the pressure from the affected Member States would require the transfer of a well-defined proportion of applicants to other Member States. But the solidarity cdmponent could also equally take other forms, from specific financial contributions to tailor-made wider contributions relevant for both the internal and external migration field and taking into account the perspective and capacity of each Member State, such as:

    • Financial contributions to the MS under pressure and/or countries of origin/transit of migrants dedicated to relieving the effects of migratory pressure, supporting the functioning of the asylum system; stronger role in the implementation of Compacts; and
    • Increased contributions to EASO and EBCG to support the benefiting MS in the processing of applications, protection of external borders, joint return operations; and
    • Sharing reception facilities (notably in the case of neighbouring Member States) during the process of examining the applications for all/certain groups (e.g. specifically aimed at vulnerable asylum seekers who face specific challenges (unaccompanied minors etc.)); joint processing of applications; and
    • Relocation of returnees, meaning taking over the responsibility for return of unsuccessful asylum applicants. This could be done by relocating (taking over the responsibility for an asylum application) specifically those applicants who are, due to their nationality or other circumstances, very unlikely to be given any sort of international protection."


Spotted an error? If you've spotted a problem with this page, just click once to let us know.

Report error