An IMGW News Report
Brussels has firmly rebuffed Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s proposal to implement a “temporary territorial suspension of the right to asylum,” reinforcing that such a move contravenes EU law. Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, emphasised the Union’s obligation to provide access to asylum procedures, regardless of political pressures or migration flows.
“Tusk’s rhetoric, aimed at consolidating support against a resurgent hard-right opposition, also criticises the EU’s New Pact on Migration and Asylum, which Poland has vocally opposed.”
Brussels warns Warsaw that the suspension of the right to asylum is in violation of EU law
Tusk’s plan, set to be formally unveiled on Tuesday, is portrayed as a necessary response to migration flows allegedly orchestrated by Russia and Belarus, which have surged since August 2021. Despite recent increases in border crossings, they remain below the crisis levels witnessed in previous years. The timing of Tusk’s announcement is politically charged, as European governments increasingly seek to tighten migration policies, often testing the boundaries of established legal norms.
A Commission spokesperson underscored the dual importance of safeguarding the EU’s external borders and upholding asylum rights. “Countering hybrid attacks and ensuring asylum rights are not mutually exclusive,” they stated. The right to asylum is enshrined in international law, dating back to the 1951 Refugee Convention and reinforced by the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights, which carries the same weight as EU treaties.
While Tusk asserts that Poland needs to regain “100% control over who comes to Poland,” legal experts caution that his proposals echo controversial measures like Finland’s emergency law allowing immediate removal of asylum seekers. This raises concerns regarding the legality of such actions, which could effectively legalise pushbacks.
Tusk’s rhetoric, aimed at consolidating support against a resurgent hard-right opposition, also criticises the EU’s New Pact on Migration and Asylum, which Poland has vocally opposed. This Pact, seen as a cornerstone of the EU’s migration framework, introduces a system of “mandatory solidarity” among member states to manage asylum seekers.
“Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Poland witnessed a surge in refugees, accommodating 958,655 individuals, second only to Germany, which accepted 1,194,900.”
With migration policies at the forefront of EU discussions, the upcoming summit of EU leaders promises to be contentious. The past few months have witnessed a flurry of migration-related developments across Europe, underscoring the urgent need for a coherent and legally compliant response to the ongoing challenges. As the EU grapples with these complex issues, the commitment to uphold fundamental rights remains paramount.
The Irony: Poland Attracts Far Fewer (non-EU) Asylum Seekers Than Most Other EU States
In 2023, the European Union detected 380,000 irregular border crossings and received approximately 1,140,000 claims for international protection, indicating that most asylum applications were submitted by individuals who arrived in the bloc through legal channels. Interestingly, Poland’s asylum seeker numbers are remarkably low compared to its EU counterparts.
Among the main destination countries, Germany led with 329,035 first-time asylum applicants, accounting for 31.4% of the total, followed by Spain, France, and Italy. In stark contrast, Poland saw minimal applications, registering only a fraction of its EU peers. However, this exception came with the onset of the Ukrainian war; following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Poland witnessed a surge in refugees, accommodating 958,655 individuals, second only to Germany, which accepted 1,194,900.
This context highlights the irony of Tusk’s push for stricter asylum measures, as Poland recorded significantly fewer asylum seekers than countries such as Hungary (30), Slovakia (370), and Malta (490). While Tusk calls for greater control over migration, the reality is that Poland’s appeal as a destination for asylum seekers remains limited, challenging the narrative that underpins his proposed policy changes.
