EU: Immigration & asylum:In the pipeline (feature)
01 September 1996
The Convention on Extradition between Member States, signed on 27 September, effectively ends the possibility of EU nationals applying for asylum in another Member State, by allowing extradition for political offences between the member states. Other disquieting features of the Convention are that extradition can be obtained for political offences even where the person concerned did not take part in the offence; and it can be obtained without the consent of the surrendering state, which may not refuse extradition on grounds of political motivation.
The Justice and Home Affairs Council, meeting under the "third pillar", continues to produce recommendations, joint actions, common positions to regulate immigration and asylum policies among the fifteen member states. There are concerns that the proposed Joint Action on certain aspects of the status of refugees recognised by the Member States might water down existing international obligations under the Geneva Convention. A number of organisations dealing with refugees expressed concern in particular over the document's restrictive family reunion provisions. The House of Lords' European Communities Committee has cleared the proposal, but seeks clarification from Home Secretary Michael Howard on whether it allows Member States to impose a more limited interpretation of the Geneva Convention than that currently agreed by the international community.
The Presidency proposal for a draft Convention on the establishment of the EURODAC system for the identification of asylum applicants (6545/96; see Statewatch, vol 6, no 4) has been welcomed by the Home Office as a measure to facilitate the implementation of the Dublin Convention and deal with serial asylum-seekers (by identifying them and sending them back to the country where they first claimed asylum). In its Explanatory Note, however, the Home Office rejects the need for the European Court of Justice to be involved in the interpretation of the Convention (as it rejects a role for the ECJ in any intergovernmental agreement). It also objects to the suggestion that EU funds should pay for states to implement EURODAC, maintaining that states should pay for themselves. An item note, Means of proof in the framework of the Dublin Convention (7469/94) sets out what documents can be accepted as probative evidence, and what as indicative evidence, for the assertions of asylum-seekers as to their entry and residence in EU territory.
Other reports which have recently emerged discuss Guidelines for joint reports on third countries (7471/94) and Procedures for drawing up reports in connection with joint assessments of the situation in third countries (7472/94), and separately, Circulation and confidentiality of such reports (7473/94). These minutes, dated June 1994, refer back to the setting up of CIREA (the Centre for Information and Reflection on Asylum) in 1992. According to the procedural minutes, confidentiality is clearly at a premium, and a cumbersome bureaucratic process is involved in the request and distribution procedures for reports. The guidelines on what should be covered in joint assessment reports are extremely detailed. Reports should deal with political developments in the country, including the existence of free elections, a multi-party system, a free press and an independent judiciary, activities of the security services and the situation of minorities; the security situation; the general human rights situation including policy and practice; the extent of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment including legislation enshrining racial discrimination and frequent use of the death penalty; conditions in prisons, arbitrary arrests, recourse to the courts; state persecution of particular groups, including extreme conditions involved in military service; unwillingness to protect members of a particular group seriously threatened by fellow citizens; and the existence of a real "internal flight alter