Common European Asylum System in a Changing World

Hypothetical examples of Member States positions

Poland:

Hungary: AIM: no mandatory allocation mechanism at all (no flexibility) . Sanctions to MS who do not control their external border controls effectively. MS have to have sufficient resources to help themselves as HU has and is able. No pathways further from MS of first entry. 100% buy out – EUR 250,000 is not reasonable. AIM: no mandatory allocation mechanism, but in case there is one – more objective reference key – more criteria (like unemployment, cultural ties with the applicants). 36/3 – prefer even stricter rule – only applicants with relevant chance to be granted protection. Reasonable buyout for all allocations – EUR 250,000 is not reasonable.

Germany:

AIM: mandatory allocation mechanism for all MS. 36/3 important to keep – MS of first entry shall have certain obligations. Reference key shall reflect number of applications Germany is still facing. Threshold % – flexible but only on condition that MS of first entry fulfil their obligation like registration and security checks. Flexible on buy out (EUR 250,000 is not reasonable) but no to 100% allocations buy-out.

Sweden:

AIM: mandatory allocation mechanism for all MS. Accent on solidarity – threshold % too high. Flexible in many areas such as 36/3, but no buy out.

Greece:

AIMAIM: mandatory allocation mechanism for all MS. Allocation of all applicants – 36/3 problem. 150% threshold problem – too high, crisis prevention needed. Reference key – further criteria needed. No buy out.

France:

AIM: mandatory allocation mechanism for all MS but flexible in many areas in order to reach compromise, ie. only partial obligation. Threshold % – flexible. 36/3 – prefer even stricter rule – only applicants with relevant chance to be granted protection. Flexible on reasonable buy out (EUR 250,000 is not reasonable), ideally only to certain % of allocations.

Italy:

AIM: mandatory allocation mechanism for all MSs. Allocation of all applicants – 36/3 problem. 150% threshold problem – too high, crisis prevention needed. Reference key – further criteria needed. No buyout.

80