Nov 11, 2023 at 1:24 p.m
Several political parties intend to limit the number of people who can apply for asylum. But that is not possible, experts tell NU.nl.
A maximum number of asylum seekers has already been proposed, but is not possible in principle, says Lieneke Slingenberg, professor of migration law at the VU. It appears that this idea is being bandied about more often: more than a year ago, for example, Slingenberg also said that a complete asylum stop was not an option.
Although this is known, several parties have nevertheless included the intention to limit the number of asylum applications in their programme. This should reduce the problems in the country’s overloaded asylum system.
BBB wants to limit the number of asylum seekers to fifteen thousand per year. VVD only wants to enforce a maximum if other decisions have first been taken to limit the number of asylum seekers. PVV and JA21 want a temporary complete stop on asylum migration.
But countries should not send people back to a situation where they are at risk, Slingenberg says. This is laid down, among other things, in the United Nations Refugee Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Netherlands has also agreed to this.
Many snags when withdrawing from agreements
The Netherlands can withdraw from this, but there are “terrible many snags”, says Karin Geuijen. She is a public administration expert at Utrecht University and specializes in migration policy. “If you cancel one treaty, you also have to cancel or adjust many other agreements.” This would mean that the Netherlands would also partially withdraw from agreements made with other EU countries. This in turn has consequences for the economic and political position of the Netherlands.
Geuijen also points out that terminating these treaties does not result in fewer refugees. “They do not leave because they have the opportunity to go somewhere through a treaty, but because of war, violence and persecution,” the public administration expert explains.
Neighboring countries will also be anything but happy with the decision to admit fewer people. “Ultimately, this is a bit of a passing of responsibility,” says Geuijen. “Refugees have to be protected somewhere. You can’t say: just figure it out.”
Countries are trying to limit it in other ways
Logically, there are no other countries in Europe that have set a limit on the number of asylum applications. Both experts see that countries are trying to limit the number of new asylum seekers in other ways.
Take Italy, which wants to receive asylum seekers in Albania. Or the United Kingdom, which made an agreement with Rwanda to forward asylum seekers to that East African country. That plan is in doubt because the judge has ruled against the United Kingdom.
Within the EU there is also discussion about a division of the various tasks surrounding migration. Who receives the asylum seeker and arranges the procedure, and which country takes care of the return of rejected asylum seekers? And are there countries that, if they wish, can accommodate fewer people in exchange for money for the countries that do?
The plan has been in the air for years, but the EU countries cannot agree. According to Geuijen, this mainly has to do with the different interests of the countries. Most asylum seekers first arrive in Southern European countries. The Northern European countries prefer that asylum seekers enter the asylum process there and in other arrival countries. Eastern European countries prefer not to receive asylum seekers at all.
Sanne Oving is a domestic reporter at NU.nl
Sanne follows major domestic themes for NU.nl, such as healthcare and asylum.
What is possible then?
Other forms of migration can be limited without violating European agreements, say Slingenberg and Geuijen. Asylum migrants form only a small part of the total number of people who want to settle in the Netherlands: many more labor and knowledge migrants come this way every year.
But stopping labor and study migration is not popular. Not only companies and educational institutions benefit from these people. Some shrinking regions are also in great need of extra foreign hands and knowledge. “Very sharp choices would have to be made there,” says Geuijen.
Finally, according to Geuijen, it is not the case that the current problems in asylum reception are a result of the number of asylum seekers who report here. “The problems in reception are an organizational issue. Cuts were made to asylum reception when it seemed that there would be fewer asylum seekers, while it is known that migration is a fluctuating phenomenon. If you then start cutting back on the number of reception places and the number of people that can assess asylum applications, you create your own problem.”
2023-11-11 12:24:47
#parties #maximum #number #asylum #seekers #option #Domestic
