REVISITING THE DUBLIN CONVENTION
(21138)
7122/00
| Commission staff working document: "Revisiting the Dublin Convention".
|
| Legal base:
| — |
| |
| Document originated:
| 21 March 2000 |
| Forwarded to the Council:
| 24 March 2000 |
| Deposited in Parliament:
| 17 April 2000 |
| Department: |
Home Office |
| Basis of consideration:
| EM of 10 May 2000 |
| Previous Committee Report:
| None |
| To be discussed in Council:
| Not applicable |
| Committee's assessment:
| Politically important |
| Committee's decision:
| Cleared |
Background
11.1 The Dublin Convention provides a mechanism
for determining the Member State responsible for examining an
asylum application lodged in one of the Member States. It entered
into force on 1 September 1997, effectively replacing similar
arrangements which had been in force amongst the Schengen States.
An Executive Committee ( the "Article 18 Committee")
examines matters of application and interpretation. Following
the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Dublin Convention
needs to be replaced with a Title IV Community instrument.
The document
11.2 This working document was prepared by Commission
staff to initiate debate on how well the Dublin Convention has
worked to date, and how it might best be replaced. It was presented
to the JHA Council in March. The Minister of State at the Home
Office (Mrs Barbara Roche) explains that, as a working document,
it would not normally be deposited. However, it appears that the
Commission itself has provided copies for deposit in the Parliamentary
Libraries. The Government has therefore produced an Explanatory
Memorandum to assist the Scrutiny Committees. The Minister emphasises
that no formal Commission proposal for legislation has been made.
11.3 The document summarises the background to
the Convention and identifies significant developments since its
coming into force. It then suggests possible objectives of the
Convention and examines it in the light of these, assessing its
clarity, efficiency and effectiveness. In its conclusion, the
working document notes some serious concerns, as well as some
developments which should improve the situation. It suggests some
possible alternative mechanisms for allocating responsibilities,
but admits these are not easy to identify. Finally, it makes it
clear that the measure has not worked as well as was hoped, and
indicates the Commission's willingness to "co-ordinate a
more detailed practical evaluation in order to provide a full
picture of the operation of the Convention".
The Government's view
11.4 The Minister comments:
"We agree with the Commission
that the proper approach is to first consider how the Convention
has worked in practice since September 1997. This is particularly
so given that the Dublin text itself was finalised as long ago
as 1990. The Commission notes that there have been many changes
in the European landscape since that time such as the practical
realisation of the abolition of internal frontiers between some
Member States resulting from Schengen co-operation, enlargement
of the EU itself and the moves to develop the EURODAC database
of fingerprints. In these circumstances evaluation is an essential
first step.
"The Commission acknowledges that the need to
produce a First Pillar instrument offers the opportunity to consider
new models for the allocation of responsibility for asylum claims
between Member States, but at the same time notes that no system
designed to achieve this is likely to meet all identified needs.
The Commission suggests that the evaluation of the present model
provides the basis for discussions, particularly when coupled
with other developments towards harmonisation in the areas of
asylum procedures, reception conditions, interpretation of the
refugee definition and subsidiary protection. We support this
approach."
11.5 The Minister tells us that she understands
that, as a next step, the Commission will prepare an evaluation
questionnaire concerning the operation of the Dublin Convention
since September 1997. She undertakes to inform us about the evaluation
process when the Commission produces a draft proposal for a First
Pillar measure.
Conclusion
11.6 We are pleased to have had the opportunity
of considering this useful working document which has given us
a good basis for our eventual scrutiny of any draft proposal for
legislation in this area. We thank the Minister for providing
a helpful Explanatory Memorandum.
| 
