DCMUN 24 European Commision

I. Letter from the EB

II. Abstract
III. Overview
-Introduction to Committee
-Structure, Membership, Governance
-Mandate, Function, Powers
-Recent sessions and Current priorities
-Introduction to the agenda
-Conclusion

IV. History, Background and Related Information

-Introduction
-Frontier Countries
-Schengen Agreement and Internal Migration
-Refugee Migration Patterns
-The Dublin Accords
-European Union Refugee Crisis 2015
-European Union-Turkey Deal
-Case Study-Syria
-Conclusion

V. The Geneva Refugee Convention and Human Rights Violations

-Introduction
-Background and History
-Details of the Geneva Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol
-Oversights of Geneva Refugee Convention of 1951
-Conclusion

VI. The EU’s 2024 Migration and Asylum Pact & Problems
-Introduction
-5 pillars of the 2024 pact
-Challenges and Concerns
-Problems with the EU's 2024 Migration and Asylum Pact
-Case Studies
-Conclusion

VII. Case studies & miscellaneous

-United Kingdom-Rwanda Pact
-Italy’s blockade on Non-Governmental rescue ships
-Migrant Abuse in Libya

Page 1
VIII. Topics of discussion
IX. Summary
X. Bibliography

I. Letter from the EB

The Executive Board of the European Commission welcomes you to DCMUN 2024. It gives us
immense pleasure to serve as your Executive Board this year.

As members of the European Commision, you will, over the course of the committee, use your
problem solving and collaborative skills to find solutions for our agenda, “Reassessing European
Migration Policies in Response to Geneva Refugee Convention Compliance Concerns.” You will
be tasked to carry out these responsibilities while keeping in mind what course of action is best
for your nation and the global community as a whole. The agenda at hand is extremely pressing
today despite decades worth of effort to curb human right violation with respect to European
migration policies.

Page 2
This year is an extremely pivotal year in the history of European Migration, with a record
number of immigrants entering Europe while facing accelerating prosecution elsewhere. The
new European Migration and Asylum Pact fails in many ways to comply with Geneva’s
Migration Treaty, being accused of implementing discriminatory and racist policies. The next
steps taken by Europe in addressing this problem will lay the foundations of European views and
policies regarding migration for the next decade, and proceeding with extreme caution is
essential.

We expect you to address the new Migration and Asylum pact, thinking of solutions to ratify the
document to implement a fairer external migration policy. We also encourage you to dive deeper
into the humanitarian aspect of the agenda, and ensure humanitarian standards regarding
migrants are kept to the highest levels possible.

During the course of this committee, you will be tested on your problem solving, collaborative,
logical reasoning and lobbying skills. You will be expected to come up with original solutions
that align with your country’s and global views. Through this MUN, we hope to bring you closer
to the terrible reality that millions of migrants face in Europe every year.

This guide has been prepared as a starting point of your research. You are expected to know the
concepts in the study guide in detail, and the scope of your research should extend well beyond
the guide. We encourage you to use this guide as a reference to your research, not as the sole
source of content. This guide cannot be used as Proof of Substantive in the committee. Apart
from examining the ongoing conflict, we also expect delegates to be well-versed in the historical
background of this issue to get a better understanding of the topic and this will also help in the
smooth functioning of the committee.

We, as the executive Board of the European Commission, will try our best to make this a riveting
experience for each one of you. If you have any queries or require assistance, please do not
hesitate to reach out to us via email. Together, let’s make DCMUN 2024 an unforgettable
experience for all.

Email- [email protected]

Chairperson Vice-Chairperson Vice-Chairperson Rapporteur

Ishaan Agarwal Daksh Bhatnagar Raj Aryan Agrawal Mishika Agrawal

II. Abstract
The European Union is a unique partnership between 27 European countries, known as Member
States, or EU countries. Together they cover much of the European continent. The EU is home to
around 447 million people, which is around 6% of the world’s population. The European

Page 3
 Commission is one of the key institutions of the European Union (EU). It is responsible for
proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding the EU treaties, and managing the day-
to-day operations of the EU. The Commission acts independently of national governments and
represents the interests of the EU as a whole.

The current situation of refugees in Europe is one of the most pressing challenges of our time
and will test the continent's political cohesion, social resilience, and humanitarian aid generosity.
As conflict, persecution and environmental disasters continue to displace millions of people
around the world, Europe is at the forefront of managing the influx of refugees seeking safety
and protection from its borders. In the year 2023, 292,985 migrants entered Europe, out of
which, 4,064 remain dead or missing. In 2024, up till 20th May, the total number of migrants in
Europe had already reached 56,978, with 1,100 dead or missing. Out of these, most are refugees
trying to flee war-stricken countries ranging from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Ukraine.

The roots of this situation can be traced far back, precisely to the dawn of the 20th century, when
the World Wars led to waves of refugees seeking protection and asylum in other countries. Since
then, the EU has grappled with subsequent waves of refugees, including those which arrived in
the late 20th century after the fall of many communist regimes. Apart from this, conflicts in the
Balkans, the Middle East, and North Africa have also contributed to the arrival of a large number
of refugees. The role of frontier countries, the Schengen agreement and the Dublin Accords, to
name a few, have shaped the various patterns of migration of refugees of the present.

The 2015 refugee crisis highlighted the need for an urgent, comprehensive and coordinated
response by the EU for not just this crisis but also any and all future crises emphasising the
importance of unity and burden-sharing amongst the EU. It also brought attention to the root
causes of such migrations, such as conflict, poverty, and political instability. Whether it be the
1951 Refugee Convention also known as the Geneva Refugee Convention, which is one of the
guiding documents which define the status of refugees, which provides the countries and
refugees guidelines to follow for mutualistic symbiosis and empowerment of both the refugees
and the contracting states or the EU’s 2024 migration and asylum pact which was adopted by the
council on 14th May, 2024 aiming to ensure a fairer and stronger migration system which makes
a concrete difference on the ground, the EC and in turn the EU have always worked towards it.

Such situations have forced various countries to take independent decisions as well as those with
the EU as a whole. The EU-Turkey deal, the UK-Rwanda Pact, Italian blockade of NGO ships,
etc. have shaped the stance of the EU and in turn of EC as well as the stance of its member
states.

III. Committee Overview

Introduction to the committee

The European Union is a unique partnership between 27 European countries, known as Member
States, or EU countries. Together they cover much of the European continent. The EU is home to

Page 4
around 447 million people, which is around 6% of the world’s population. It aims to promote
peace, security, and economic prosperity through cooperation and integration in areas like trade,
security, and environmental policy. The EU that we know today has its roots in several treaties
signed in the aftermath of the Second World War. Th e EU was formed on the idea that countries
that trade with one another become economically interdependent and so are more likely to avoid
conflict, which sparked a period of economic and strategic cooperation.

The EU, thus, evolved from a primarily economic union to an entity encompassing political,
social, and environmental dimensions. While its roots lie in economic cooperation, it has
progressively expanded its scope to include policies on human rights, security, justice, and
environmental sustainability. This transformation reflects the EU's broader mission of promoting
peace, stability, and prosperity across Europe. The EU is based on the rule of law. Everything the
EU does is founded on treaties, voluntarily and democratically agreed by its EU countries, which
will be reflected in the committee's progression.

The European Commission is one of the key institutions of the European Union (EU). It is
responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding the EU treaties, and
managing the day-to-day operations of the EU. The Commission acts independently of national
governments and represents the interests of the EU as a whole. Its role is to promote the general
interest of the EU and ensure that its policies are implemented effectively. This commission was
established in 1958.

Structure

Several institutions are involved in making decisions at the EU level, in particular:

● the European Parliament, which represents EU citizens and is directly elected by them;
● the European Council, which consists of the Heads of State or Government of the EU
Member States;
● the Council of the European Union (also called the Council), which represents the
governments of the EU Member States; and
● the European Commission, which represents the interests of the EU as a whole.
It is the European Commision that proposes new laws and the Parliament and Council that
adopts them, so proposing and ratifying laws will be the main focus expectation from the
DCMUN committee.

Page 5
Membership
The following 27 countries are members of the European Union & thus represented in the
European Commission-

Country Members of the EU- Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark,
Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania
Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain,
Sweden

Governance

The European Commission has a unique governance system, with a clear distinction between
political and administrative oversight structures and well-defined lines of responsibility and
financial accountability. It is headed by a president, currently German politician Ursula von der
Leyen, who leads 27 commission members, one from each member state. These members are
often called “commissioners” and have designated portfolios, so it’s essentially a typical
executive cabinet, headed by a president who is supported by ministers. The Commissioners
represents the apex of this architecture and assumes collegial political responsibility for the work
of the European Commission. Operational implementation is delegated to Directors-General and
Heads of Service who lead the administrative structure of the European Commission.

Page 6
For this DCMUN European Commision committee, we will use country portfolios to represent
the commissioners of each EU state. There might also be portfolios not included in the European
Commision.

Mandate

What began as a purely economic union has evolved into an organisation spanning many different policy
areas – from climate, environment and health to external relations and security, justice and migration. As
enshrined in the Treaty on European Union, ‘The Union is founded on the values of respect for human
dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights
of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which
pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.
Human rights are protected by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. These cover the right to be free
from discrimination on the basis of sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual
orientation, the right to the protection of your personal data and the right to get access to justice.

Function

The European Commission has a number of functions. As the EU’s executive branch, its primary
function is to enforce EU law. But its position also means it represents the EU internationally,
and it is also tasked with managing the bloc’s budget. The primary functions of the Commission
are-

1) Legislation: The Commission initiates new legislation and makes proposals for laws that
are then sent to the European Parliament and Council of the European Union, the two
main lawmaking bodies of the EU.

2) Enforcing EU law: The Commission has the important job of enforcing binding laws and
can take action against member states, businesses or other actors that fail to comply with
EU law. The European Court of Justice can adjudicate challenges to the EC’s enforcement

3) Internal Management and Budget: The Commission manages the bloc’s internal policies,
drafts the annual budgets and checks to see how EU money is being spent under the
scrutiny of the court of auditors.

4) Representation: The Commission represents the EU in negotiations with other countries

or supranational bodies, such as NATO or the UN.

Powers

The European Commision works with the Court of Justice to ensure that EU law is properly
applied in all the member countries. Given that the European Commission has sole executive
authority, sole responsibility for preparing and proposing new European laws, and control over
the budget, it clearly has immense power. That said, the European Commission president must
be nominated by the Council and approved by the Parliament, and these two bodies have
ultimate legislative authority, so there are robust checks and balances in place. The European

Page 7
Commision also speaks on behalf of all EU countries in international bodies, in particular in
areas of trade policy and humanitarian aid and negotiates international agreements for the EU.
Decisions in the commission are taken based on collective responsibility. All countries are equal
in the decision-making process and equally accountable for these decisions. They do not have
any individual decision-making powers. In general, decisions are made by consensus, but votes
can also take place. In this case, decisions are taken by simple majority, where every country has
one vote. The Proposals are then resubmitted to the Commissioners (Representatives of the
Country) for adoption, after which they become official, and are sent to the Council and the
Parliament for the next stage in the EU legislative process.

Recent Sessions and Current Priorities

-On 8 June, 2024 The Asylum and migration management regulation was worked on. The
asylum procedure regulation establishes a common procedure across the EU that member states
need to follow when people seek international protection. The AMMR would replace, once
agreed, the current Dublin regulation. Dublin sets out rules determining which member state is
responsible for the examination of an asylum application. The AMMR will streamline these rules
and shorten time limits.

-On 30th June, 2024 The migratory situation at the EU’s external borders and within the EU was
reviewed in a comprehensive way, and work undertaken so far in the framework of a European
response was noted. The European Commission informed the European Council about the steady
progress in implementing its conclusions of 9 February 2023, with a focus on the external
aspects of migration and their financing mechanisms.

-On 8th Feb 2024, EU member states approved of the deal with European Parliament on Asylum
and migration reform This was based on the provisional deal that was reached between the
Council presidency and the European Parliament on 20 December 2023 on five key laws
(constituting the pact on asylum and migration) that will reform the EU’s asylum and migration
system. The permanent representatives committee also gave its thumbs up to three asylum and
migration laws on which Council and Parliament already reached agreement in 2022 which are a
revision of the reception conditions directive, an update of the qualification regulation, and a
regulation establishing an EU resettlement framework

-And finally, after 4 years in the making, on May 14th 2024, the Council adopted a landmark
reform of the European asylum and migration system. This establishes a set of rules that will
help to manage arrivals in an orderly way, create efficient and uniform procedures and ensure
fair burden sharing between member states.

Migration has become an important topic of discussion, as it is deeply connected with many
aspects of human life. Migration, which has been an issue in the European Union, has now

Page 8
become crucial in European politics. European society faces a variety of challenges related to
migration, such as demographic crisis, irregular migration, and the rehabilitation of asylum
seekers. The European Union has recently passed a new set of policy reforms aimed at
addressing migration and asylum issues in EU countries. This has elicited multiple reactions
from various EU partners, as it represents a change in the perception of migration that experts
believed the European Union had once followed.

Introduction to the agenda

In the year 2023, 292,985 migrants entered Europe, out of which, 4,064 remain dead or missing.
In 2024, up till 20th May, the total number of migrants in Europe had already reached 56,978,
with 1,100 dead or missing. Out of these, most are refugees trying to flee war-stricken countries
ranging from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Ukraine.

The evolving refugee crisis in Europe is one of the most pressing challenges of our time and will
test the continent's political cohesion, social resilience, and humanitarian aid generosity. As
conflict, persecution and environmental disasters continue to displace millions of people around
the world, Europe is at the forefront of managing the influx of refugees seeking safety and
protection from its borders. Given the complex geopolitical factors, addressing the crisis requires
a multipronged approach that includes humanitarian aid, political reform, and international
cooperation. The nations of Europe have an urgent task to balance their obligations under
international law with issues of national security, social cohesion and economic stability.

The conformity of European migration policies with international human rights standards,
including the Geneva Convention, has been subject to growing criticism. Recent assessments
raise serious concerns about the degradation of human rights in the EU's approach to migration.

Deterrence and externalisation are prioritised over basic human rights in the EU's migration
policies. Policies like "pushbacks," in which refugees are forcibly removed across borders
without following the correct processes for asylum, have been called illegal and cruel. For
example, the European Court of Human Rights' decision regarding Spain's denials at the
Moroccan border brought attention to the challenges that asylum seekers have when attempting
to lawfully qualify for refugee status.

The COVID-19 pandemic made these problems worse by forcing several EU members to impose
stricter border controls and restrict access to asylum processes, which left a large number of
asylum seekers trapped in appalling conditions. Human rights violations and overcrowded camps
are documented in reports, mostly in Greece and around the eastern borders of the European
Union.

The recent introduction of the EU's New Pact on Migration and Asylum has drawn criticism for
advancing the securitization of migration. This agreement prioritises border controls and quick
deportations, frequently at the expense of procedural safeguards and human rights
considerations. Human Rights Watch and other organisations contend that these policies are a
contributing factor to systemic abuses of human rights, such as unlawful retaliation and
insufficient care for asylum seekers.

Page 9
Hence “Reassessing European Migration Policies in Response to Geneva Refugee Convention
Compliance Concerns” is crucial. The current policies not only undermine the Geneva
Convention but also threaten the integrity of human rights protections across Europe. Given the
complex geopolitical factors, addressing the crisis requires a multipronged approach that
includes humanitarian aid, political reform, and international cooperation. The nations of Europe
have an urgent task to balance their obligations under international law with issues of national
security, social cohesion and economic stability.

Conclusion

From its beginnings as an economic union, the European Union—an alliance of 27 nations—has
developed into a comprehensive organisation that handles political, social, and environmental
issues. Under the direction of pivotal institutions such as the European Commission, European
Parliament, and European Council, the European Union functions according to legal principles
and collaborative decision-making, endeavouring to preserve principles of human dignity,
liberty, democracy, equality, and rights.

Recent changes, especially to the laws pertaining to immigration and asylum, show how the EU
is still working to meet modern issues The migration reforms are designed to provide equitable
burden sharing among member states and expedite procedures. However, these policies have also
sparked debates over human rights, as the EU balances its commitments under international law
with national security and social cohesion concern.

A humane and efficient response is required to the ongoing refugee crisis, with Europe leading
the way in handling the flood of displaced people fleeing for their lives. The EU must constantly
review its policies as it navigates these complex situations to make sure they are in line with its
core principles and international commitments. This committee's work will be a reflection of the
EU's commitment to finding solutions that uphold social resilience, safeguard human rights, and
maintain peace, stability, and prosperity throughout the continent.

Page 10
IV. History, Background and Related Information

Introduction

Any refugee crisis, or any global crisis in general always has a lot to uncover. The same can be
said about this complex and multifaceted refugee crisis which has persisted throughout European
history and has evolved over time. Arrival of refugees to the member states of the European
Union is influenced by a variety of factors. Whether it be conflicts, political instability or
economic disparities in the home country, the favourable conditions in Europe have always
attracted the refugees. However, over-burdening of refugees within EU countries, border control
and security threats, controversial asylum policies and many other similar problems can be seen
growing rapidly.

This refugee crisis has tested the solidarity and cohesion of the European Union as a whole. This
crisis can be traced back to the dawn of the 20th century, when the World Wars led to waves of
refugees seeking protection and asylum in other countries. Since then, the EU has grappled with
subsequent waves of refugees, including those which arrived in the late 20th century after the fall
of many communist regimes. Apart from this, conflicts in the Balkans, the Middle East, and
North Africa have also contributed to the arrival of a large number of refugees. Considering the
issue at hand, over the years, the EU has engaged in extensive policy debates, implementation of
humanitarian initiatives, and has worked towards finding comprehensive and sustainable
solutions for the refugee crisis.

The solutions taken by the European Union over the years have been characterised by a mix of
opinions where some member states find the solutions in line with their national stance while
others feel quite the opposite. Some countries have taken a humanitarian approach and taken in a
large number of refugees. On the other hand, others advocate for adopting stricter border policies
for the refugees and have pushed for more restrictive asylum policies. This has led to dissent
among many member states of the European Union.

Frontier Countries

The term frontier countries, in this aspect, refers to the countries which form the frontier of the
European Union. These countries are those which form the edge of the EU. These countries are
crucial for understanding the flow of refugees in the EU because these are the very countries
through which the refugees enter Europe and once in Europe, they are able to easily travel across
most countries due to the Schengen Agreement. More information about the same is given
further in the document.

If the arrival of refugees to these countries are controlled, the further flow of refugees from these
countries to others would be prevented. This is a chain reaction where if this does not happen,
the refugees entering the frontier countries may further enter other interior countries due to
which it may be difficult to monitor them.
A great example is the Mediterranean region and the countries in it which are easily accessible
from Northern Africa and the Middle East. If a large number of refugees enter from these

Page 11
frontier countries, which does actually happen, the refugees make their way to the other end and
towards the border with other EU countries and enter those. If this cycle persists, it would be
harmful for both the countries and the refugees because of the mismanagement and over-
concentration of refugees in countries. Therefore, the frontier countries must regularly monitor
the refugees entering their territories.

Schengen Agreement and Internal Migration

The area under the Schengen Agreement includes 26 European countries where internal border
controls have been eliminated. This has enabled unrestricted movement of individuals within the
zone. The Schengen Agreement was formulated in 1985 and since then has facilitated the
movement of people from one member nation to another.
Although the treaty has made it easier for member nations to travel and do business with each
other, this is also a concern for the refugee crisis. A refugee who has entered one country of the
Schengen region, essentially has open access to many others.

The primary goal of the Schengen Agreement is to increase liberty, safety, and fairness within its
member states and thus it allows for movement of people between member countries without
necessary passport checks or visa regulations. However, this also makes it extremely difficult to
efficiently control the flow of refugees within the EU.

It is important to note that freedom of movement within the Schengen region does not always
mean uncontrolled migration because the member states still possess the authority to regulate
their external borders and in turn monitor the immigration through them. The Schengen
Information System or SIS for short is often used by the member states to share information
about the migrating individuals who could be a security risk.

To summarise, although the Schengen region provides for potential unmonitored refugee flow,
some steps can be taken to control this issue without adversely affecting the agreement between
the member states. Therefore, it is crucial to find a middle ground between the concepts of
unrestricted movement and the necessity for protection.

Refugee Migration Patterns

To properly understand the issue, it is vital to understand the routes via which the refugees arrive
into Europe. It is also essential to have a deep understanding of the patterns, trends and statistics
of not just the flow of refugees but also the number of asylum seekers.
The following are the primary routes via which the refugees tend to enter Europe:

● Central Mediterranean: The refugees who choose this path generally arrive via the sea to the
islands of Italy and Malta. These refugees generally belong to sub-Saharan Africa and North
Africa and travel to the Mediterranean via Tunisia and Libya, where they cross the
Mediterranean with the help of boats. The number of asylum-seekers along this route has
increased significantly since 2020.

Page 12
● Eastern Mediterranean: This route is generally taken by the refugees which arrive to the EU
from Syria. They cross the sea and arrive in Greece, Cyprus and Bulgaria. The number of
refugees arriving via this route has decreased significantly since 2016 because of the EU-Turkey
deal. More information about this deal has been mentioned further in the document.

● Western Mediterranean: The refugees arrive in Spain and its North African enclaves Ceuta and
Melilla via this route. Migrants which come here are mainly from Morocco and Algeria but some
are also from nearby parts of sub-Saharan Africa. The number of refugees arriving via this route
peaked in 2018 but has declined ever since due to a cooperation between Spain and Morocco.

● West Africa: With irregular arrivals in the Canary Islands the refugees which choose this route
generally transit through Morocco, Western Sahara, Mauritania, Senegal and Gambia. In recent
years, the number of arrivals via this route has increased significantly.
Since the Russia-Ukraine crisis, a large number of refugees from Ukraine and other nearby
regions have also been entering the European Union. Some refugees also arrive via waterways to
other EU states which are accessible via waterways.

Flow of Refugees to the EU

Source of Image: Reuters

Over time, the EU has adopted several frameworks regulating legal migration flows through
resettlement programmes and instruments aimed at attracting highly skilled workers, students,
researchers, seasonal workers, as well as facilitating intra-corporate transfers and family
reunifications. In order to relaunch these programmes, a series of measures are planned, in view
of which the European Commission presented the Communication “Attracting skills and talent to
the EU”.

Some other statistical information related to refugee migration trends in the EU as of March
2024:
● The EU and its asylum authorities received 83,000 asylum applications in March 2024, the
lowest level for almost a year.

Page 13
● Syrians continued to lodge by far the most applications, 14% of all applications in March
2024, and up by 12% compared to a year earlier.
● In March 2024, Germany received the most applications for asylum, 22% of the total, but
Cyprus received by far the most applications per capita.
● The number of cases awaiting a first instance decision increased to more than 913,000 in
March 2024 which is the most for more than seven years.
● At the end of March 2024, about 4.3 million persons were benefiting from temporary
protection in the EUs after fleeing Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Most beneficiaries
were hosted by Germany and Poland, but Czechia hosted the most beneficiaries per capita.

The Dublin Accords

The Dublin Regulation Accord is an agreement between Iceland, Switzerland, Liechtenstein,

Norway and the member states of the European Union with regard to the processing of refugees
in the year 2002. According to the pact, a refugee arriving in any of the aforementioned states
will be processed in the state of arrival and that country will be considered the contracting state.

Each refugee can have his or her application considered in only one of the participating countries
from the pact. The countries in collaboration are often referred to as the Dublin countries and the
case of such an asylum seeker is called a Dublin case. Therefore, the Dublin Regulation
determines which country is responsible for the refugee and his/her application. Considering that
a refugee can apply in only one Dublin country, if he/she were to apply in another Dublin state,
he/she would be reverted back to the original Dublin country which would consider its
application. For example, if a refugee applies for asylum in Iceland, the case would become a
Dublin case. The first consideration while processing the case would be if the refugee belongs to
any other Dublin state. If yes, he/she would be sent back to the original Dublin state. If the
answer is no and Iceland becomes the Dublin state which would take the refugee into
consideration and then it will consider if the refugee needs asylum in Iceland.
It also must be noted that unaccompanied minors may be reallocated to a different Dublin state if
they have a family there and their application process has been successful.

European Union Refugee Crisis 2015

The European refugee crisis which unfolded in 2015 was a test of the resilience and effectiveness
of the way the EU dealt with refugees. The large number of refugees which arrived, from
conflict-prone regions like war-torn Syria, placed an enormous burden on the member states
which in turn helped stretch the limits and capacities of the contracting countries. The crisis
highlighted the need for an urgent, comprehensive and coordinated response by the EU for not
just this crisis but also any and all future crises emphasising the importance of unity and burden-
sharing amongst the EU. It also brought attention to the root causes of such migrations, such as
conflict, poverty, and political instability.

Timeline

Page 14
● April 20th, 2015: About 700 people drowned in the Mediterranean when their boat sank at
about midnight on April 18 in Libyan waters some 180 kilometres south of Italy's Lampedusa
Island. A subsequent Italian and Maltese rescue operation ultimately could only save some 50 of
an estimated 700 people on board. UN High Commissioner for Refugees António Guterres
expressed his shock at this latest refugee tragedy and urged European countries to restore a
"robust" rescue-at-sea operation.

● August 28th, 2015: Austrian authorities uncovered the bodies of 71 refugees and migrants in a
refrigeration truck abandoned near the Austrian border with Hungary. Police said the truck had
come from Hungary and that the victims might have been dead for one or two days. UNHCR's
Melissa Fleming said the grim discovery highlighted "the desperation of people seeking
protection or a new life in Europe," and urged greater cooperation among European police
forces, intelligence agencies and international organisations "to crack down on the smuggling
trade while putting in place measures to protect and care for victims."

● September 4th, 2015: The image of a young Syrian boy, Aylan Kurdi, whose body washed up
on a Turkish beach after a failed attempt to reach Greece, moved millions worldwide and threw a
fresh spotlight on the human tragedies of those trying to reach the shores of Europe. The head of
the UN Refugee Agency António Guterres, emphasising that the European Union faced a
"defining moment," Laid out key guidelines that he said should underpin all efforts to resolve the
refugee and migration crisis facing Europe. By the time Aylan's body washed ashore, more than
300,000 people had risked their lives to reach Europe. Over 2,600 had perished in the attempt.

● September 5th, 2015: More than 1,000 refugees in Hungary marched out of Budapest towards
the Austrian border in protest of the Hungarian government's refusal to provide trains to Austria
and Germany. That decision was reversed overnight when buses were provided by the Hungarian
authorities to take the exhausted refugees to the border where they were met by volunteers from
the Austrian Red Cross and the Austrian Order of Malta holding handwritten signs saying
'welcome', and handing out waterproof clothes, food, water, milk and blankets. UNHCR
applauded Austria and Germany for keeping their borders open and saluted the work of civil
society groups.

● September 15th, 2015: Hungary completed a fence along its border with Serbia. With other
European countries temporarily reinstating border controls, two decades of open borders in the
EU ended. UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, warned that refugees could "find themselves
moving around in legal limbo" and that different border control measures by European states
"only underlines the urgency of establishing a comprehensive European response."

● October 9th, 2015: A group of 19 asylum seekers was relocated from Italy to Sweden under a
European Union relocation scheme. The scheme outlined measures to relocate 160,000 refugees
from Italy and Greece and was seen as an important step toward stabilising the refugee crisis in
Europe. The 19 Eritreans were relocated to Lulea, Sweden, just south of the Polar Circle

Page 15
.

● November 4th, 2015: The first relocations from Greece under a European Union scheme to
resettle 160,000 refugees from Europe's first ports of entry started with some 30 asylum-seekers
from Syria and Iraq heading to Luxembourg. The six families, with a total of 19 children, were
relocated as part of a cooperative effort led by national authorities in Greece and Luxembourg,
with support from European agencies, international organisations that included UNHCR, and
other partners.

● December 7th, 2015: More than 911,000 refugees and migrants had arrived on European
shores since the year began and some 3,550 lives had been lost during the journey. Over 75 per
cent of those arriving in Europe had fled conflict and persecution in Syria, Afghanistan or Iraq.

European Union-Turkey Deal

The European Union-Turkey deal is often referred to as the ‘statement of cooperation between
the EU and Turkey. It was signed in March of 2016. This pact has three fundamental points.
Firstly, it advises Turkey to take any measures to prevent refugees from irregularly migrating
from Turkey to the Greek islands. Any refugee arriving from Turkey to the Greek islands
irregularly can be detained by the legal authorities.

Secondly, for every Syrian refugee returned from the Greek islands or detained because of
irregular migration control, the EU member states would accept one Syrian refugee from Turkey
who had waited for his/her processing in Turkey.

Finally, in exchange for these provisions Turkey would also receive 6 billion Euros to improve
the humanitarian situation faced by the refugees within Turkey. Additionally, Turkish nationals
would be allowed visa free entrance in Europe.

This agreement was one of EU’s sharpest responses to the number of refugees entering the
region especially during the refugee crisis of 2015 where nearly 1 million refugees arrived in the
territories of EU while nearly 4000 more tragically lost their lives on the journey. More than
three fourth of these refugees were from middle Eastern countries like Syria, Afghanistan, Iran
and many others who fled from their home countries to prevent persecution. This new mass
arrival led the EU member states to close their borders in early 2016 as a temporary measure to
prevent large-scale irregular immigration of refugees. Even after this the number of new arrivals
in frontier countries like Greece, which were easily accessible by the Mediterranean Sea,
remained high. Thus, the EU adapted a long term deal to close such borders. The EU started to
pressurise countries like Turkey to close its borders for the refugees. These negotiations lead to
the European Union-Turkey deal of 2016.

Although this deal has helped decrease the number of

refugees entering Europe, the number of refugees being permitted via Turkey legally also
remains much lower than it should be statistically. This situation was further affected by the
covid-19 pandemic where detained refugees were stuck in Greece and could not be processed

Page 16
either to Turkey or to the European Union. The Greek Council of state has sometimes claimed
this pact to not be ideal in present condition and in need of reforms but the Turkish government
continues to believe in it.

At the same time, illegal practices of deterrence and informal forced returns of asylum seekers
from accessing Greek and European territory are evolving, as recorded in the recent Interim
Report of the Recording Mechanism of Incidents of Informal Forced Returns and in the unprecedented
number of interventions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) to the Greek
authorities in the last year. This third safe countries system is considered beneficial by few and
terrible by the others however this pact still remains a defining step taken by the EU for the
refugee crisis but many organisations consider this to be anti-humanitarian.

Case Studies

1) Syria

March 2011 was the beginning of one of the darkest times in Syrian history. The Syrian
government started a violent crackdown on protests and demonstrations in the favour of a few
teenagers who were arrested for anti-government graffiti in a Syrian city called Daraa.

Page 17
This intern sparked even more protests and demonstrations across the nation which were again
faced by violent government suppression. This in turn led to increased control of the
Government Security Forces over the freedom and rights of citizens.

This conflict accelerated rapidly and culminated into a deadly civil war which led millions to flee
their homes in search of refuge from the violent government actions. Although 13 years have
passed, the conflict remains ongoing as more and more Syrians are continuing to pay the price.
According to reports, 70% of the Syrians alive worldwide are in need of humanitarian help and
are either in search of refuge or struggling to live in their homes in Syria. The number is near 17
million.

The Syrian refugee crisis remains to be one of the world’s biggest refugee crises. Naturally,
many Syrians have also entered the EU as refugees with high concentrations in countries like
Sweden and Germany among many others. Germany is also the largest host country not
neighbouring Syria with more than 850,000 refugees. Apart from this, an additional 6.5 million
Syrians are internally displaced in Syria with 90% of them living below the poverty line. About
5.5 million more refugees are in asylums in neighbouring countries of Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan,
Iraq and Egypt.

Conclusion

The refugee crisis is a continuous one. As the refugee crisis unfolds, the EU faces and will
continue to face various challenges to find a suitable, sustainable and comprehensive solution to
the issue. Efforts to address the root causes of migration, improve cooperation with countries of
origin and transit, and strengthen the EU's asylum system are all crucial components of a holistic
approach to managing the refugee crisis. The EU must navigate complex political dynamics,
public opinion, and legal frameworks to strike a balance between humanitarian concerns and
national interests in order to effectively address the challenges posed by the refugee crisis.

In conclusion, the history of the refugee crisis in relation to the European Union has been a
complex and challenging journey. The EU has faced numerous waves of refugees seeking safety
and protection within its borders, with each crisis presenting unique circumstances and demands.

Despite the challenges, the EU has made significant efforts to manage the refugee crisis and find
sustainable solutions. The establishment of the Common European Asylum System and the
implementation of the EU-Turkey Statement are examples of the EU's commitment to addressing
the crisis. However, it is clear that more needs to be done to enhance cooperation, strengthen
external borders, and improve the integration of refugees into European societies. The history of
the refugee crisis within the European Union serves as a reminder of the importance of solidarity,
compassion, and effective collaboration in addressing one of the most pressing challenges of our
time.

Page 18
V. The Geneva Refugee Convention and Human Right Violations

Introduction

The 1951 Refugee Convention also known as the Geneva Refugee Convention is one of the
guiding documents which define the status of refugees. It provides the countries and refugees
guidelines to follow for mutualistic symbiosis and empowerment of both the refugees and the
contracting states.

The Refugee Convention of 1951 however was made specifically for refugees who had to leave
their nations due to the Second World War and its aftermath. Therefore the convention was only
responsible for refugees from Europe who left their country of origin before January 1st, 1951.
As a result of these constraints, in 1967, a follow-up protocol was established which would
abolish all such restrictions. This was done because of the growing consensus between member
states that the refugee issue was a global crisis. This protocol came to be known as the 1967
Protocol of the Geneva Refugee Convention or simply the 1967 Protocol.

These two documents are the keystone to any refugee issue as they are the very documents which
define not only what a refugee is but also define the relation between the contracting state and
the refugee along with the rights and duties of both the parties involved. These documents also
outline the international standard of protection which each refugee must be provided by the
contracting state. Hence, the refugees, who are the most vulnerable people, are protected by the
Geneva Refugee Convention, supplemented by its 1967 Protocol. The convention and its
protocol are thus the basis for the workings of all refugee committees.

Background and History

As the result of the First World War, a large no. of people left their homelands in search of
refuge. In response, the governments of the countries ended up drawing a set of agreements
amongst each other to provide travel documents and credentials to these people. These led to
formal international agreements and eventually the people searching for refuge came to be
known as refugees, effectively becoming the first refugees to be formally recognised in the 20th
century. The countries which hosted these refugees came to be known as the contracting states.

The number of refugees drastically increased with the coming years because of the Great
Depression and eventually because of the Second World War. Millions more were displaced. To
control this issue, the international community gradually put together a set of rules, guidelines
and conventions in order to protect the fundamental and basic human rights the refugees were

Page 19
entitled to. This process was started under the former League of Nations in the year 1921 and
eventually culminated in the 1951 Convention on Refugee.
The convention gradually expanded and consolidated previous international accords and
measures related to refugees in order to provide a comprehensive and elaborative document
which would provide the nations a guideline to ensure the protection to the rights of refugees
globally.

Details of the Geneva Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol

-Definition of a Refugee

The 1951 Refugee Convention defines a refugee as a person who "owing to well-founded fear of
being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social
group or political opinion, is outside the country of [their] nationality and is unable or, owing to
such fear, is unwilling to avail [themself] of the protection of that country."
Regional legal instruments in Africa and the Americas have broadened this definition by
including people who are compelled to leave their country because of “external aggression,
occupation, foreign domination, internal conflicts, massive violation of human rights or events
seriously disturbing public order”.

Apart from this, there were many exemptions to who was considered a refugee. Any person
already receiving help from a UN organisation like the United Nations Korean Reconstruction
Agency (UNKRA) was not considered a refugee. Additionally, any individual involved in crimes
against peace, war crimes, crimes against humanity, serious non-political crimes outside the
country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee or anyone guilty of acts
contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations would not be considered a refugee.

-Rights of a Refugee and Responsibilities of the Contracting States

The Geneva Convention contains a list of refugee rights that correspond to obligations of States.
Refugee rights are, however, different in structure and philosophy compared to the rights
recognized by subsequent universal human rights instruments, such as the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and
Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

The main reason is that at the time of the drafting of the Convention, the precise scope of human
rights had not yet been crystallised, despite the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights in 1948.10 Some of the rights under the Convention are ‘absolute’, even though
exceptions are occasionally possible, in the sense that they are provided without any comparison
to other groups, and some are contingent on a comparison with other groups.

There are three different standards of comparison in this regard: first, the standard of national
treatment, second the standard of the most-favoured national (MFN) treatment, i.e., of the best
treatment granted to nationals of another State, and third, the standard of treatment accorded to
aliens generally

Page 20
Although there are numerous rights spread across the 37 primary articles of the convention, the
following provide a summarised understanding of them. It is highly recommended to check the
full document before the conference. Apart from the specified rights, the 1951 Convention also
protects other rights of refugees, such as the rights to education, access to justice, employment,
and other fundamental freedoms and privileges similarly enshrined in international and regional
human rights treaties.

Right to Non-Refoulement: The contracting states must not return a refugee to “the
frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his
race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.”

-Right to Freedom of Movement: Freedom of movement is an especially important

issue with regard to protracted refugee situations in countries with limited national
resources and/or limited legal frameworks for protecting refugees who nonetheless host
large refugee populations.

-Right to Liberty and Security of the Person: The right to liberty and security of the
person is important in the context of how asylum seekers are treated within the intended
country of refuge. The national laws of several countries provide for the detention of
asylum seekers at one point or another during the adjudication of their claims.

-Right to Family Life: The family is seen as the “natural and fundamental group unit of
society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.”In respect of this right, a
number of countries provide for the granting of derivative status to dependent relatives.
Thus, where an individual is granted asylum, his or her dependent relatives will also
receive protection through him or her.

Oversights of Geneva Refugee Convention of 1951

Although the convention has 149 signatory states the refugee issue still persists with some
member states not fulfilling their dues towards this humanitarian crisis. Where some countries
are accused of violations, others fail to deal with the large number of refugees. The problem
persists and the lives of the refugees are constantly at risk. Apart from this, the convention also
has a few oversights.

Geographical and Time Limits and the 1967 Protocol

The Geneva Convention on Refugees was adopted in 1951 but entered into force on 22 April
1954, and it has been subject to only one amendment in the form of a 1967 Protocol, which
removed the geographic and temporal limits of the 1951 Convention. The 1951 Convention, as a
post-Second World War instrument, was originally limited in scope to persons fleeing events
occurring before 1 January 1951 and within Europe. The 1967 Protocol removed these
limitations and thus gave the convention universal coverage. It has since been supplemented by

Page 21
refugee and subsidiary protection regimes in several regions, as well as via the progressive
development of international human rights law.

Improper Integration of Refugees in the Local Communities

Over the years millions of refugees have gathered in various contracting states however the rate
of their integration with the regional community remains low. This can further cause problems
such as unemployment amongst refugees, heavy development on government funding and
resources and in absence of which, dissent with the government which has unfortunately led to
increased violence amongst the parties involved.

A great example of this rise of gang wars linked to the second generation of refugees in countries
housing millions of refugees like Sweden which once had one of the lowest levels of gun crimes
in Europe but as of 2023, this rose to approximately 2.5 times of the European average.

Although refugees can not directly be blamed for such cases, it is worth noting that the social
integration of refugees remains a broad and vague topic under the 1951 Convention. This
prevents the refugees from fulfilling their potential as a human resource and this also creates a
sense of alienation from the regional community and the contracting state.

Discriminative Policies and Actions

Although, any form of discrimination amongst the immigrants is prohibited by the 1951
Convention, this does not prevent some member states from doing so regardless. A great
example of this is the refugee crisis of 2015. Approximately one million people came to the EU
as refugees in 2015 alone. This was 5 times the number from the year before. However not all
refugees were welcomed equally. Some member states were heavily biassed against the Muslim
immigrants.

In the 2015-2016 Shadow Report on racism and discrimination against migrants conducted by
the European Network Against Racism (ENAR) it was prominent that many refugees from
African or Middle-Eastern origin were claimed as ‘economic’ or ‘illegal’ migrants and were
allegedly denied entry without any political assessments of the push and pull factors.

Conclusion

In conclusion, even though not completely ideal and perfect, the 1951 Geneva Refugee
Convention still is a testament to the international community's commitment to protecting the
rights and well-being of refugees. This agreement was a turning point for fostering the
fundamental rights of the refugees. This convention provides a legal framework to the
international community to resolve refugee issues.

The significance of this convention can not be reiterated enough times. By establishing clear
guidelines, regarding most aspects of a life of refugee, the pact not only holds importance in the
lives of those affected, that is the refugees, but it also holds a historic importance as a treaty

Page 22
made in 1951 stills holds as much if not more importance in the present times and only needed
one amendment till now.

As we move forward, it is imperative that we continue to uphold the principles enshrined and
enhance and enrich those very principles of the Geneva Convention. This would facilitate us to
strive for greater international cooperation to address the evolving challenges faced by refugees
in the 21st century.

VI. The EU’s 2024 Migration and Asylum Pact & Problems

Introduction-

In the wake of unprecedented global displacement and mounting pressures on its borders, the
European Union (EU) stands at a crossroads in its approach to migration and asylum governance.
From the Syrian refugee crisis to the ongoing influx of migrants from conflict-ridden regions, the
EU has grappled with a myriad of political and humanitarian dilemmas which in turn are shaping
the evolution of its migration policies and fostering debates on principles of burden-sharing,
solidarity, and human rights protection. The EU’s 2024 migration and asylum pact which was
adopted by the council on 14th May, 2024 aims to ensure a fairer and stronger migration system
which makes a concrete difference on the ground. Furthermore, it consists of a set of rules and
regulations which establish a common asylum system at EU level, that delivers results while
remaining grounded in the European values.

As delegates, when you scrutinise the pact’s provisions, you must grapple with some imperative
questions surrounding the protection of vulnerable populations, the adequacy of reception
conditions, the long-term prospects for refugee integration, steps the EU can take for greater
cohesion and cooperation amongst member states, EU’s role in addressing the drivers of
migration beyond its borders and the crucial role of sustainability. In addition to that, think of
solutions such that the EU can strike a delicate balance between border security imperatives and
its humanitarian obligations as well as address the root causes of displacement.

5 pillars of the 2024 pact

The 2024 EU migration and asylum pact is structured around 5 key pillars which aims to provide
a comprehensive and cohesive approach to migration management across the EU.
The 5 pillars are as follows-

1) Strengthening External Borders

The pact prioritises robust external border management, aiming to create a more secure and
efficient system. This includes enhancing screening processes and expanding Frontex, the EU's
border agency. However, resource constraints cast a long shadow. A 2023 report by the
European Parliament analysis estimated that Frontex would require a significant budget increase
of €1.9 billion for 2025-2027 to effectively manage external borders. Securing member state

Page 23
approval for such a substantial increase remains uncertain, potentially hindering the pact's
effectiveness.
This focus on border security raises concerns about potential human rights violations during
screening procedures. Amnesty International (2024) warns of the increased use of surveillance
technologies and the treatment of vulnerable groups like children and families (EU Migration
Pact: A Missed Opportunity for a Humane and Effective Approach). Additionally, a heavy
reliance on border security could foster a "fortress mentality," potentially hindering cooperation
with third countries on migration management and resettlement programs, hindering a holistic
approach to the issue.
Statistics paint a clearer picture of the challenge. Frontex intercepted over 230,000 irregular
border crossings at the EU's external borders in 2023. However, a 2024 study by the Migration
Policy Institute reveals a public perception favouring tighter borders, with 63% of Europeans
believing the EU should do more to strengthen its external borders. Reconciling public opinion
with effective and humane border management remains a central challenge for the pact.

2) The Controversial Relocation Mechanism

One of the most contentious aspects of the pact is the relocation mechanism. It offers member
states a choice: relocate asylum seekers arriving at their borders or contribute financially to
support frontline countries like Greece and Italy, which bear a disproportionate burden.
However, this "opt-out" clause has been fiercely opposed by Eastern European nations like
Poland and Hungary, who have historically resisted mandatory quotas (Reuters, 2024: Poland
Won't Accept Migrant Relocation Mechanism, PM Says). This undermines the core principle of
solidarity within the EU, potentially leaving frontline states overburdened and fuelling
resentment among their citizens.
The opt-out clause creates a two-tier system, as evidenced by statistics. In 2023, over 80% of
asylum applications in the EU were lodged in just five countries, according to the UN Refugee
Agency (UNHCR) (Caritas, 2024: What's Wrong with the EU's Pact on Migration?). This
unequal burden sharing can fuel anti-immigrant sentiment and empower populist parties across
the EU. A 2024 poll by the Pew Research Center revealed that immigration remains a top
concern for many Europeans, with significant variations in attitudes between member states
(Issues with Refugees and Migrants). A 2024 study by the European Council on Foreign
Relations found that 38% of Europeans believe their country takes in too many refugees. This
perception, fuelled by unequal burden sharing, could further strain relations between member
states and hinder future cooperation on migration issues.

3) Faster and More Efficient Procedures

The 2024 EU Migration and Asylum Pact prioritises streamlining asylum procedures to reduce
the current backlog of applications straining the system. While this aims to improve efficiency,
concerns arise regarding potential compromises on fairness and the rights of asylum seekers.
Human Rights Watch (2023) warns that a faster system might sacrifice thorough assessments,
overlooking vulnerabilities and potentially leading to wrongful denials of asylum claims (EU
Migration Pact: A Disaster for Migrants and Asylum Seekers). Balancing speed with due process
remains a critical challenge.
The quest for efficiency could lead to rushed assessments, potentially overlooking the
vulnerabilities of asylum seekers and violating their rights. A 2024 report by the Council of

Page 24
Europe's Commissioner for Human Rights found that several EU member states struggle to
ensure fair and efficient asylum procedures due to a lack of resources and trained personnel. This
highlights the importance of adequate resources alongside streamlined procedures to ensure fair
and thorough assessments.
Furthermore, a faster system could lead to increased reliance on detention, particularly for those
whose asylum claims are initially rejected. Caritas (2024) raises concerns about the
psychological toll on vulnerable groups like children and families held in detention centres. This
raises ethical concerns about the use of detention, particularly for those who may ultimately be
granted asylum. Additionally, streamlining procedures alone might not address the root causes of
migration. The pact risks becoming a system that simply manages the flow of asylum seekers
rather than addressing the underlying issues that compel them to leave their homes in the first
place. A 2024 study by the Migration Policy Institute found that over 60% of Europeans believe
the EU should do more to address the root causes of migration in source countries. Focusing
solely on faster processing risks neglecting a long-term solution to the migration challenge.
Statistics:
● In 2023, the average processing time for asylum applications in the EU was over 18
months, according to the European Commission.
● A 2024 report by the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) found that over 30% of asylum
seekers in the EU are children.

4) Addressing the Root Causes

While the pact acknowledges the need to tackle the root causes of migration, such as poverty,
conflict, and climate change, critics argue that it lacks concrete measures for achieving this.
Increased development aid and diplomatic efforts to address regional instability are crucial
aspects often missing from the discussion (European Commission, 2024). Without a
comprehensive approach that tackles the root causes, the pact might become a reactive measure
rather than a proactive solution, failing to address the underlying drivers of migration in the long
run.
The pact doesn't specify a dedicated budget for development aid or diplomatic efforts focused on
addressing the root causes of migration. A 2024 report by the Overseas Development Institute
found that while some EU member states have increased their development aid budgets, the
overall level of aid remains below the UN target of 0.7% of Gross National Income (GNI). This
lack of dedicated resources weakens the pact's commitment to addressing the root causes of
migration. Furthermore, the pact prioritises immediate responses to migration flows, potentially
neglecting long-term solutions. A 2024 study by the World Bank suggests that investing in
education, healthcare, and job creation in source countries can significantly reduce migration
pressures over time. The pact's focus on short-term responses risks overlooking long-term
strategies that could prevent future migration flows.
Statistics:
● The EU is the world's largest donor of development aid, but in 2023, it only provided
0.51% of its GNI as official development assistance (OECD).
● A 2024 report by the International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates that creating
40 million new jobs per year in Africa by 2030 is crucial to address potential future
migration pressures from the continent.

5) Safeguarding Fundamental Rights and International Protection

Page 25
The 2024 EU Migration and Asylum Pact emphasises upholding human rights and international
protection principles. However, this commitment faces challenges due to the pact's focus on
border control and expedited procedures. Amnesty International (2024) warns that the pact could
lead to "pushbacks," where migrants are returned to unsafe countries, bypassing proper asylum
procedures (EU Migration Pact: A Missed Opportunity for a Humane and Effective
Approach).Additionally, increased reliance on detention centres and surveillance technologies
could infringe upon the rights and dignity of asylum seekers.

Challenges and Concerns

The emphasis on border security in the pact raises concerns about potential violations of
international refugee law. A 2024 report by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights (OHCHR) documented an increase in "pushbacks" at EU borders, particularly in Eastern
European member states. This practice undermines the fundamental right to seek asylum and
could expose migrants to further harm in their countries of origin.
Furthermore, the pact's potential increase in reliance on detention centres and surveillance
technologies raises concerns about the rights and dignity of asylum seekers. The Council of
Europe (2024) warns that prolonged detention can have a detrimental impact on mental health,
particularly for vulnerable groups like children. Additionally, the use of surveillance
technologies raises concerns about privacy violations and the potential misuse of data collected
on asylum seekers.

Statistics:
● The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) estimates that over 1,000 pushbacks occurred at
EU borders in 2023.
● A 2024 report by the European Prison Observatory found that over 30% of asylum
seekers in detention centres across the EU suffer from depression or anxiety.

Problems with the EU's 2024 Migration and Asylum Pact

The EU's 2024 Migration and Asylum Pact, while aiming to create a more unified approach to
migration, faces significant challenges that could undermine its effectiveness and humanity.
Here's a breakdown of some key concerns:

1. Increased Detention and Potential Human Rights Violations:

● The pact expands the use of detention, including for children and families, raising
concerns about breaches of fundamental rights and increased suffering for asylum
seekers.
● Amnesty International warns that the pact could lead to "pushbacks," where migrants
are returned to unsafe countries, and inadequate asylum procedures.

2. Unfair Burden Sharing and Lack of Solidarity:

● The pact offers member states a choice between relocating asylum seekers or
contributing financially, creating a system seen as unfair by some.
● Eastern European countries like Poland and Hungary have strongly opposed mandatory
relocation quotas, hindering true solidarity within the EU.

3. Insufficient Resources and Ineffective Border Management:

Page 26
 ● Critics argue the pact lacks dedicated resources for proper screening at external
borders, raising concerns about efficiency and potential security risks.
● The pact offers no clear framework for addressing large-scale migration influxes or
situations of crisis.

4. Potential for Exploitation and Secondary Movements:

● The pact's reliance on a single point of asylum application could incentivize "shopping
around" for more favourable treatment in certain member states.
● Clearer regulations are needed to deter secondary movements within the EU.

5. Weakening of International Protection Standards:

● Human rights groups fear the pact undermines the right to asylum by prioritising
border control over a fair and full assessment of individual protection needs.
Case Studies
NGOs operating in the Mediterranean continue to play a vital role in search and rescue
operations but call for a more robust and humane EU response. Meanwhile, the EU is working
with North African countries to create opportunities and discourage irregular migration, though
results have been mixed so far. Italy, a historic entry point for many migrants, is advocating for a
more equitable distribution of asylum seekers across the EU. In Germany, a major destination
country, efforts are underway to reduce processing times for asylum applications, but the nation
continues to struggle with a backlog of cases. Greece, a frontline state facing high migrant
arrivals, is testing new border technologies but faces criticism for push backs of asylum seekers
at sea

Conclusion
The five pillars of the EU Migration and Asylum Pact 2024 include securing borders, putting in
place a relocation system, simplifying procedures, resolving underlying issues, and protecting
fundamental rights in order to build a cohesive strategy to migration. But it faces many obstacles,
such as possible human rights abuses from tighter border controls, weakened solidarity from the
relocation mechanism's opt-out clause, and compromised justice in accelerated processes.
Furthermore, the agreement takes a reactive rather than a proactive stance because it does not
provide specific actions or resources to address underlying issues like poverty and conflict.
Prioritising border security brings up additional human rights issues, like incarceration for
extended periods of time and pushbacks. For the agreement to be successful, it must strike a
balance between security and humanitarian obligations, guarantee equitable burden-sharing,
supply the required resources, and address the underlying causes. All of these requirements call
for efficient implementation, continuous evaluation, and robust member state cooperation.

VII. Case Studies

1) United Kingdom-Rwanda Pact

Page 27
On 14 April 2022, the government of the United Kingdom (UK) announced a new Migration and
Economic Development Partnership (MEDP) with the Government of Rwanda, later renamed as
the UK-Rwanda Asylum Partnership. The two governments subsequently signed the UK-
Rwanda Asylum Partnership Treaty on 5 December 2023, and the UK Government published the
Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill on 6 December 2023. The Safety of Rwanda
Act was passed into law by Parliament on 23 April 2024.
As a result of these agreements, refugees in the UK would now be sent to Rwanda before their
claims are heard or verified. Once they have reached Rwanda, it would be the responsibility of
the national asylum of Rwanda to go through the claims of these refugees and to decide whether
or not they need global protection. These refugees would not return back to the UK under any
circumstances and will stay in Rwanda even if they are granted humanitarian status.
Although beneficial for the UK, the UNHCR externalising asylum obligations poses serious risks
for the safety of refugees. Many officials have questioned the morality and humanitarianism of
such deals. The arrangement however proposes a relatively new asylum model of third-party
involvement which unfortunately is presently not ideal as it undermines global solidarity and the
established international refugee protection system. It is not compatible with the international
refugee law.
Another interesting key point here is that although all the procedures are in place, the British
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has clearly specified that these transfers will only take place once
and if he is re-elected in the elections happening on 4th July this year. Considering that the
decision would probably be taken by the time of the MUN conference, the delegates are
suggested to be in touch with whatever happens

2) Italy's Blockade on Non-Governmental Rescue Ships

In November 2022, Italy's new far-right government, led by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni,
made headlines for its controversial handling of asylum seekers rescued at sea by NGO ships.
Humanitarian efforts and national immigration regulations often clash, as seen by the example of
the "Humanity 1," run by the German organisation SOS Humanity.

In the Sicilian port of Catania, the ship "Humanity 1," carrying 179 passengers, was given
permission to dock. However, Italian authorities allowed only sick people, toddlers, and those
considered "vulnerable" to disembark. This choice left 35 men on board, and the captain of the
ship refused to leave the harbour unless everyone who had been rescued was permitted to
evacuate. This resulted in a standoff. SOS Humanity stated its intentions to file a lawsuit against
the Italian government for breaking European law and the Geneva Refugee Convention
(GHRTV) (MyJoyOnline) (Pipedot), arguing that maritime law requires the captain to make sure
all rescued individuals are transferred to safety on shore.

Other non-governmental ships, such as the Médecins Sans Frontières-operated "Geo Barents,"
have had similar issues due to selective disembarkation procedures. These cases draw attention
to the more general difficulties and legal controversies pertaining to how asylum seekers are
treated and what obligations states have under international law.

This case emphasises the need for European migration policies to be re-assessed in order to
properly handle humanitarian concerns and maintain conformity with international agreements.

Page 28
3) Migrant Abuse in Libya

A 2023 report by the UN Independent Fact-Finding Mission on Libya revealed that migrants in
Libya face systematic crimes against humanity. These include forced disappearances, rape,
torture, arbitrary detention, and servitude. Detention facilities are infamous for their harsh
circumstances and exploitation. They are run by Libyan government agencies such as the
Directorate for Combating Illegal Migration and the Libyan Coast Guard. Torture, forced labour,
and sexual slavery are just some of the abuses migrants are frequently subjected to. \

In February 2023, The Human Rights Watch revealed 3 that the European Union keeps
providing financial and logistical support to Libyan authorities in spite of their knowledge of
these atrocities. Training and equipment for the Libyan Coast Guard, which deters and sends
back migrants to Libya, where they endure more mistreatment, is part of this support. Rather
than defending the human rights of migrants, the EU has come under fire for its activities, which
have been described as prolonging the cycle of violence and exploitation against migrants.

In an effort to hold the EU accountable for these serious human rights breaches, groups including
Lawyers for Justice in Libya and REDRESS have lodged complaints with the UN Human Rights
Committee. These groups contend that Libya & the EU have not done enough to safeguard
migrants and demand compensation as well as steps to stop such violations in the future.

Page 29
VIII. Topics of discussion
1. Current European Migration Policies that potentially violate the Geneva Refugee Convention

2. Possibility of expanding or replicating the EU-Turkey deal with other neighbouring nations

3. Impact of Border Controls and Asylum Procedures on Refugee Rights

4. Responsibilities and Burdens of Frontline States in the EU

5. Balancing National Security Concerns with Refugee Protections & Addressing ‘Racist’
Policies

6. Legal and Ethical Implications of Returning Refugees to Unsafe Countrie/ Third Party
Countries

7. The Role of Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in Assisting Refugees

8. Innovative Solutions for Housing and Employment of Refugees

9. Solutions for Improving Human Rights in regard to European Migration policies

Page 30
IX. Summary
The refugee crisis is an ongoing concern for the European Union. As the crisis continues to
develop, the EU faces and will continue to face a range of challenges in finding a suitable,
sustainable, and comprehensive solution. Efforts to address the root causes of migration, improve
cooperation with countries of origin and transit, and strengthen the EU's asylum system are all
crucial components of a holistic approach to managing the crisis. Navigating complex political
dynamics, public opinion, and legal frameworks is essential for striking a balance between
humanitarian concerns and national interests in effectively addressing the challenges posed by
the refugee crisis. The history of the crisis emphasizes the importance of solidarity and
collaboration in tackling this urgent issue. Moving forward, it is essential to uphold and
strengthen the principles of the Geneva Convention to address the evolving challenges faced by
refugees in the 21st century. By enhancing international cooperation, we can work towards
ensuring the well-being and rights of refugees are protected. The EU has shown dedication in
managing the refugee crisis through initiatives like the Common European Asylum System and
the EU-Turkey Statement. However, due to demerits of a few of the decisions taken by nations,
independently and as a whole, there is an urgent need for further cooperation with all parties
involved regarding border security and refugee integration.

The EU Migration and Asylum Pact 2024 is underpinned by five core principles: border security,
a relocation framework, procedural simplification, root cause resolution, and fundamental rights
protection. However, it faces several challenges, including potential human rights violations
arising from stricter border controls, weakened solidarity due to opt-out clauses in the relocation
system, and compromised justice in accelerated processes. The agreement's reactive nature,
without specific actions to address poverty and conflict, is a significant concern. Emphasizing
border security raises human rights issues like prolonged detention and pushbacks. Success
hinges on striking a balance between security and humanitarian obligations, ensuring equitable
burden-sharing, providing necessary resources, and addressing root causes. Efficient
implementation, ongoing evaluation, and strong member state cooperation are essential for the
pact's success. However, many of these steps are hindered severely by steps taken by individual
nations. Whether it be the UK-Rwanda Pact, blockade of NGO ships by Italy or the abuse of
Syrian people leading to increase in refugees, all these actions are along a very thin line between
unsecure open borders allowing each and every person into the nation and possibly, the into rest

Page 31
of EU and between completely restricted borders ensuring barely any entry and in turn leading to
violations of fundamental human rights and various other treaties and in many cases, resulting in
the death of thousands of helpless individuals.

In conclusion, the refugee crisis in Europe highlights the need for collaboration and solidarity to
tackle contemporary challenges. As the number of refugees increases and reaches alarming
levels, the response of European nations will be a litmus test of their commitment to the basic
values of humanity, compassion and international cooperation. The refugee crisis transcends
simple political debates. It strikes at the core of Europe's identity and the principles on which the
European Union was built. By navigating the complexities of geopolitical dynamics and
balancing national interests with humanitarian challenges, Europe has an opportunity to reassert
its role as a beacon of hope and defender of human rights on the global stage. Looking ahead,
Delegates in the committee must focus on dialogue, compassion and sustainable solutions in
their approach to managing the refugee crisis. By embracing diversity, upholding the rights and
dignity of all and promoting inclusive societies, we hope that Europe will emerge stronger and
stronger in the face of the crisis. In the spirit of cooperation and shared responsibility, let us work
together to create a future where no one is left behind, where compassion triumphs over
impartiality and the principles of justice, equality and peace guide our common journey. A better
world.

Page 32
Page 33
X. Bibliography
The 1951 Refugee Convention | UNHCR. (n.d.). UNHCR. https://www.unhcr.org/about-unhcr/who-
we-are/1951-refugee-convention

Racism and discrimination in the context of migration in Europe. (2008a, November 6).
European Website on Integration. https://migrant-integration.ec.europa.eu/library-document/racism-
and-discrimination-context-migration-europe_en

Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees | UNHCR. (n.d.). UNHCR.
https://www.unhcr.org/media/convention-and-protocol-relating-status-refugees

Asylum & the Rights of Refugees. (2019, August 2). International Justice Resource Center.
https://ijrcenter.org/refugee-law/#:~:text=The%201951%20Convention%20also%20protects,and
%20regional%20human%20rights%20treaties

Country responsible for asylum application (Dublin Regulation). (n.d.). Migration and Home
Affairs. https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/common-european-asylum-
system/country-responsible-asylum-application-dublin-regulation_en

Ali, M., & Ritzen, Y. (2015, December 9). Syrian refugee crisis in numbers. Al Jazeera.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/12/9/syrian-refugee-crisis-in-numbers

Latest Asylum Trends. (n.d.). European Union Agency for Asylum. https://euaa.europa.eu/latest-
asylum-trends-asylum#:~:text=Per%20receiving%20country,to%2022%25%20of%20the%20total .

Page 34
World Bank Open Data. (n.d.). World Bank Open Data.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SM.POP.REFG?locations=EU-1W&name_desc=false

Della Cooperazione Internazionale, M. D. a. E. E. (n.d.). Migration flows to the EU – Ministero

degli Affari Esteri e della Cooperazione Internazionale. https://www.esteri.it/en/politica-estera-e-
cooperazione-allo-sviluppo/politica_europea/dossier/migrazioni/

Unpacking the most contested aspects of the EU’s new Migration and Asylum Pact. (2024, April
18). The Parliament Magazine. https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/news/article/unpacking-the-
most-contested-elements-of-the-eus-new-migration-and-asylum-pact#:~: text=The%20solidarity
%20mechanism%20is%20one,influx%20of%20migrants%20and%20refugees

Scruggs, D. N. (2024, April 11). The EU’s new migration and asylum pact hollows out the right
to asylum. Civil Rights Defenders. https://crd.org/2024/04/11/the-eus-new-migration-and-asylum-
pact-hollows-out-the-right-to-asylum/

The EU response to migration and asylum | Topics | European Parliament. (n.d.). Topics |
European Parliament. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20170629STO78629/the-eu-
response-to-migration-and-asylum

Page 35