This policy brief was written for INRL20160 Introduction to EU Politics at University College Dublin during the 2025/26 academic year. The module asks students to identify a live problem on the EU agenda, weigh the options open to the Union, and set out concrete recommendations. The brief is reproduced here as submitted.
Executive Summary
In the past decade, migration has been a pressing issue on the EU agenda. Despite previous attempts at managing migration falling short, in 2020 a new proposal was introduced focusing on specific key objectives, like solidarity.
This brief recognizes the recent desires put forward by the EU to ensure a fair and effective migration policy while at the same time acknowledging the existing gaps in its approach to solidarity, externalization, and human rights. The European Union should always strive for the most humane approach rooted in legislative frameworks that are equipped for all member states and third countries alike.
Context and Importance
In 2020, the European Commission laid the foundations for the New Pact on Migration and Asylum, and after years of negotiation, it was finally adopted in 2024 by the European Parliament. It proposes a new approach in managing migration in Europe, focusing on “securing external borders, guaranteeing people’s rights, and ensuring that no EU country is left alone under pressure” (European Commission, 2024a). The AMMR, or the Asylum and Migration Management Regulation, is set to be applied by all member states by 2026 and replaces the current Dublin regulation (EMNireland, 2025).
Starting in 2015, the refugee crisis had pushed Europe to take swift action in managing and regulating the influx of migrants and refugees. It revealed structural flaws in the Dublin agreement and called for a reevaluation of migration management in the EU. During this second attempt, more attention was paid to the needs of the member states and its subsequent solidarity aspect (Grelsson, 2024).
Critique of Policy Options
The New Pact on Asylum and Migration has been met with a certain level of criticism but nevertheless continues to be in practice despite pushback from civil society organizations, academic scholars, and even government officials (Human Rights Watch, 2024; Bellavitis; Undersigned Ministers, 2024).
This New Pact puts a strong emphasis on its revalued solidarity principle, aiming to create a fairer system for all member states. However, the ‘first country of entry ‘principle, where the asylum procedure takes place in the first country the migrant/refugee arrives, is still intact (EMNireland, 2025). This directly discredits the commission’s focus on solidarity, as it ultimately puts an advantage on member states without external borders (Human Rights Watch, 2024).
A second common critique of the New Pact concerns the EU’s efforts to externalize the issue of migration to non-EU countries, which commonly happens through the ‘safe third country principle’ as EU countries are released of their responsibilities in the asylum process (Human Rights Watch, 2024). This has fueled partnerships between the member states and third countries, which has prevented people from crossing into Europe (Doctors Without Borders, 2024). A recent increase in these partnerships also shows a preference for technicality over legality or transparency (Bellavitis and Servent, 2025, 3). Nevertheless, these partnerships are not built to last, as third countries have voiced their disapproval of this strategy (Bellavitis and Servent, 2025, 9).
A last and very important issue people take with this pact is its approach to border control and its subsequent exposure to human rights violations (Amnesty International, 2024). Within the context of the ‘legal fiction of non-entry,’ asylum seekers risk getting into dangerous situations and even pushbacks as they are not considered to be in EU territory (Human Rights Watch, 2024). At these borders they are heavily restricted in their movement and are subsequently held in detention centers with sometimes no regard for age or vulnerability (UNHCR, 2025). This course of action has already proven to lead to inhuman conditions (Human Rights Watch, 2024).
Policy Recommendations
Providing Safety at the Borders
In the interest of improving this policy, the European Union should first and foremost look towards improving the safety measures at the borders for all asylum seekers (Amnesty International, 2024). In the process of border procedures, detention should not be a default measure. If detention methods are requested, it is important to look towards alternatives to detention, or ‘ATDs,’ first. People in vulnerable conditions should be exempt from difficult border screening and should instead be provided with adequate support measures (UNHCR, 2025, 5). The differences in legislative and policy frameworks and scale of migration in the member states make developing universally applicable ATDs challenging. To facilitate this process, it is important to address the contextual differences while still aiming to adhere to international standards (Council of Europe, 2029, 14-15).
Creating an Even Playing Field for Member States
If the EU wishes to uphold its solidarity principle, they must focus on having an adequate distribution system that factors in all countries (Human Rights Watch, 2024). The EU should look towards financially benefiting areas that place high value on asylum seekers and disregard the ‘first country of entry principle’ completely. A common control measure must be applied so that all member states adhere to the same asylum rules and there will be no more human rights violations (Greens/EFA, 2020, 9). Dismissing the first country of entry principle does create a greater risk of incentivizing irregular secondary movements (European Commission, 2024b). To avoid that, it’s important to focus on the preferences of the asylum seeker, which will ultimately foster integration, creating an incentive to stay rather than move (Greens/EFA, 2020).
Fostering Third Country Relations
To avoid backlash from third countries, the EU should focus on improving their foreign relations with their Mediterranean partners (Undersigned Ministers, 2024, 2). In that process all deals being made should be grounded in legislative frameworks and subsequently provide transparency for the member states and their citizens. By opting for a more politicized approach, it will likely create an uptick in polarized political debates and public scrutiny. Nevertheless, by encouraging tailored solutions for different third country partners, the EU could more easily navigate those criticisms (Bellavitis and Servent, 2025).
Bibliography
Amnesty International (2024) EU: Migration and Asylum Pact reforms will put people at heightened risk of human rights violations. Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/04/eu-migration-asylum-pact-put-people-at-risk-human-rights-violations/ (Accessed: October 6, 2025).
Arnoux Bellavitis, M. and Ripoll Servent, A. (2025) “The New Pact on Migration and Asylum in a shifting political context: Depoliticization and repoliticization in EU external migration policy,” Mediterranean Politics, 0(0), pp. 1–10. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2025.2498846. (Accessed: 8 October, 2025)
Council of Europe (2019) Practical Guidance on Alternatives to Immigration Detention: Fostering Effective Results(CM(2019)147). Available at: https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectID=0900001680979cb1 (Accessed: 6 November 2025).
Doctors Without Borders (2024) How European policies choose violence against migrants and refugees. Available at: https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/latest/how-european-policies-choose-violence-against-migrants-and-refugees (Accessed: 8 October 2025).
EMNireland (2025) What is the EU Pact’s new Asylum and Migration Management Regulation?, The European Migration Network, 14 July. Available at: https://emn.ie/what-is-the-eu-pacts-new-asylum-and-migration-management-regulation/ (Accessed: October 7, 2025).
European Commission (2024a) Pact on Migration and Asylum. Available at: https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/pact-migration-and-asylum_en (Accessed: 7 November 2025).
European Commission (2024b) Questions and Answers on the Pact on Migration and Asylum. Available at: https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/pact-migration-and-asylum/questions-and-answers-pact-migration-and-asylum_en (Accessed: 7 November 2025).
Greens/EFA (2020) Proposal for a Fair and Efficient Asylum System in Europe. Brussels: Greens/EFA in the European Parliament. Available at: https://www.greens-efa.eu (Accessed: 8 October 2025).
Grelsson, E. (2024) Explaining the New Solidarity Mechanism in the EU´s Migration Pact. http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1928427/FULLTEXT01.pdf (Accessed: 8 October 2025).
Human Rights Watch (2024) Civil Society Organisations Call on MEPs to Vote Down Harmful EU Migration Pact. Available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/04/15/civil-society-organisations-call-meps-vote-down-harmful-eu-migration-pact (Accessed: October 8, 2025).
Undersigned Ministers. (2024). Joint letter from the undersigned ministers on new solutions to address irregular migration to Europe. Available at: https://www.politico.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/27/Joint-Letter-to-the-European-Commission-on-new-solutions-to-address-irregular-migration-to-Europe.pdf (Accessed: October 8, 2025)
UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) (2025) UNHCR Advocacy Brief: Restrictions of movement, detention and alternatives to detention under the European Union Pact on Migration and Asylum. Available at: https://www.refworld.org/legal/intlegcomments/unhcr/2025/en/150579 (Accessed: October 8, 2025).
The Brussels Insider 