Acceso usuarios
Marguerite Arnoux Bellavitis
This article aims to explore the impact that policy-making in times of crisis can have on the fundamental rights of migrants. In times of emergency and crisis situations, European institutions tend to bypass fundamental steps of the policymaking procedures, including the collection of evidence on which the legislative proposal will be developed. The permanent crisis situation in asylum and migration has led the EU institutions, particularly the European Commission to work in crisis mode since 2015. The Recast Return Directive Proposal was presented in 2018, and the Screening Regulation Proposal was presented in 2020 as part of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum. They were both presented during political crises and are currently under negotiation. Those texts did not go through evidence-based preparatory work within the Commission (such as impact assessments and stakeholders’ consultations), and their contents are emblematic of the securitised and restrictive approach at the EU level, thus making them very symbolic and political policy proposals. This restrictive trend goes against the existing fact-based need, acknowledged by the Commission, to attract migrants to address demographic challenges. This contribution seeks to analyse, through an interdisciplinary approach based on qualitative research methods, the impact that crises have on the EU decisionmaking, and their consequences for the human rights of migrants, based on two case studies of two legislative proposals currently under negotiation: the Recast Return Directive Proposal and the Screening Regulation Proposal.
