Europe’s path for a just migration

Europe’s novel set of solutions to deal with waves of migrants arriving without papers may now pivot on a handful of individual cases in Italy. On Monday, a court in Rome ruled that seven asylum-seekers held in an Italian-run detention center in the nearby country of Albania must be brought to Italy. That follows a similar ruling last month involving 12 other migrants detained under similar circumstances.

The two cases go to the crux of a problem affecting two parallel approaches to managing the influx of people seeking access to Europe without authorization. One rests on European countries processing asylum applications outside the boundaries of the European Union prior to arrival. The other depends on third countries detaining migrants and vetting their applications.

Both approaches have required striking a balance between the rule of law and compassion both for the migrants and for the countries where they seek to resettle. European law forbids detaining migrants in or returning them to points of origin that pose a risk to their well-being. The tricky part is determining whether countries are safe.

In Italy, the judges have asked the Court of Justice of the EU for clarity. A year ago, Italy signed a deal with Albania to build two facilities to house asylum-seekers while it considers their applications. The 19 migrants ordered to be sent to Italy were from either Bangladesh or Egypt – two of 19 countries on Rome’s list of places it deems safe.

But by what measure? That was the question the judges in the first case asked. The judges argued that Germany under the Nazis was “an extremely safe country” that provided “an enviable level of security” to the majority of its citizens.

Determining and guaranteeing safety for migrants may be even more difficult for European countries attempting the second approach. Illegal migration into Europe has fallen in the past year and stands at a fraction of the yearly influx a decade ago. Yet the rise of right-wing populist movements has given new currency to the idea of essentially offshoring the problem altogether.

The Netherlands is exploring a plan to send unprocessed migrants to Uganda. Germany has lately expressed interest in pursuing a similar arrangement with Rwanda – even though the same idea helped topple a government in Britain in July. (U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to bring back his “Remain in Mexico” policy for asylum-seekers.)

Meanwhile, both the British government and Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, have lately embraced Italy’s approach.

For now, judges in Europe seem to be influencing the direction of the EU’s migrant policies. Yet, wrote Charlotte Slente, secretary-general of the Danish Refugee Council, in the news site EUobserver, “We must unite behind our shared commitments and work in lockstep to uphold our moral and legal duties to those in need.”

“Upholding our asylum obligations and border management are not mutually exclusive. Both are essential to the integrity, and soul, of not just the European project, but the humanity that unites us all.”