Live

In October, Polish media, citing sources in Brussels, reported that Poland might be excused from the mechanism of relocation and financial contribution under the EU’s Pact on Migration and Asylum.

Later reports, citing Poland’s Ministry of Interior and Administration, specified that Poland would be excluded from the mechanism for one year. This decision is reportedly tied to the migratory pressure from the East. The ministry also suggested that Poland’s situation could justify extending this exemption in the following years.

“As long as I am responsible for governing in Poland, regardless of the further stages of the Migration Pact, Poland has ways and will not accept any migrants under the relocation mechanism. Not a single migrant. And the topic is closed from our point of view,” stated Prime Minister Donald Tusk during a speech in Racibórz.

So, is the decision to exempt Poland from relocation and its financial equivalent official? And what is the ‘relocation or money’ system all about? Let’s break down the Migration Pact and the ‘solidarity mechanism.’

What is the EU Migration Pact, Really?

When most people talk about the EU Migration Pact, they are referring to the so-called Solidarity Mechanism, which outlines three types of contributions by EU member states to manage immigration.

In reality, the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum is a collection of ten different legal acts. These cover not just the division of responsibility among EU states, but also the control of people entering the Union, asylum seekers’ procedures, and related databases. Not all regulations in the package are as controversial as the relocation proposal.

The Pact was designed to finally solve years of arguments over how to share the burden of the so-called migration crisis. Remember back in 2016, when the then-Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi complained and even threatened others, demanding solidarity for Italy as it struggled with a massive influx of refugees? EU leaders spent countless, marathon summits trying to fix the issue.

Ultimately, the European Commission presented the draft Pact on Migration and Asylum in September 2020. The European Parliament voted it through on April 10, 2024, and the EU Council adopted it a month later, on May 14, 2024. Only three countries—Poland, Hungary, and Slovakia—voted against it, but this wasn’t enough to form the ‘blocking minority.’

The European Commission claims the Pact is “a guarantee of strong and secure external borders of the Union, respect for the rights of different groups of people, and solidarity among EU countries in the face of challenges.”

The Pact’s Four Cornerstones

The Migration Pact is built on four main pillars:

  1. Strong External EU Borders

  2. Fast and Effective Asylum Procedures

  3. An Efficient System of Solidarity and Responsibility

  4. Addressing Migration in International Partnerships

Strengthening external borders, for example, involves turning the existing Eurodac database into a full-fledged asylum and migration database. This will allow for the unambiguous identification of all people entering the EU as asylum seekers or irregular migrants. This part is generally less controversial among EU states.

The procedures point deals with determining which country is responsible for handling a specific asylum application. Up until now, the ‘Dublin criteria’ stated that the country of first entry handled the application, which has been a major point of contention.

The Pact also harmonizes the rules for processing asylum applications and the criteria needed to receive protection. Previously, rules in this area differed significantly between countries.

The efficient system of responsibility and solidarity mainly refers to the most controversial part: the regulation introducing the principle critics call ‘compulsory solidarity.’

The final pillar addresses preventing illegal entries into the EU, partly through cooperation with Frontex, but also through the much-demanded strategy of ‘acting at the source’ of immigration by working with countries of origin and fighting human smuggling.

The Solidarity Mechanism: Relocation or Money?

The regulation on asylum and migration management is the most talked-about part of the Pact.

As the European Commission puts it, it establishes a new permanent solidarity mechanism among member states “to balance the current system where only a few member states are responsible for the vast majority of asylum applications.”

The new system introduces clear rules on responsibility for handling asylum applications and preventing secondary movements. The KE argues that under the new system, “no member state under pressure will be left alone.” At the same time, every country must make a fair contribution to migration management at the EU level.

The Migration Pact essentially abolishes mandatory refugee relocation. From now on, governments can choose their type of contribution to show solidarity with states facing increased migratory pressure.

The first—and most preferred by the EU—type of contribution is Relocation, meaning taking responsibility for processing a specific number of asylum applications.

The second type is a Financial Contribution to the countries facing migratory pressure. The set rate is €20,000 for every unaccepted refugee.

The third type is Operational Support, such as sending personnel or material aid to those states.

An “Exclusion” or Just a Rule?

The Polish government suggests that the decision to ‘exclude Poland from the Migration Pact’ (which, let’s remember, is not yet official) is a success of Poland’s firm policy. Other voices claim it’s the result of official letters sent to the Commission.

Did the European Commission really cave to pressure from Warsaw? Not exactly. What some politicians and media are calling an “exclusion” is actually the implementation of a provision within the Pact itself.

The Migration Pact allows a country that is under ‘migratory pressure’ or in a ‘significant migration situation’ to be partially or totally exempted from the obligation to participate in relocation, financial, or operational contributions.

What’s the difference? ‘Migratory pressure’ means a situation where a country receives so many people or asylum applications by land, sea, or air that it “imposes disproportionate obligations on the Member State,” even with a well-prepared asylum system.

In this situation, the country not only won’t have to accept asylum seekers from other states or pay the financial equivalent, but it could actually become a beneficiary of the Pact, with other countries taking refugees from it and providing financial contributions.

A ‘significant migration situation’ is less about the sheer number of arrivals and more about the cumulative impact over time. Even a well-prepared country can face difficulties if the influx of immigrants accumulates. This also applies to countries that take in a large number of immigrants moving from other countries.

According to reports, the European Commission’s likely reason for classifying Poland as a country under migratory pressure or in a significant migration situation is the vast number of Ukrainian war refugees we have accepted (nearly a million were still in Poland at the beginning of the year) and the pressure on our eastern border, which the EU recognizes as a result of the instrumentalization of migration by Moscow and Minsk.

Is the Decision Only Valid for One Year?

Unfortunately, yes. Under the Pact, every year by October 15, the European Commission is supposed to adopt three documents:

  • An annual report evaluating the migration situation across the EU.

  • An implementing decision specifying which countries are currently under migratory pressure or at risk of it, and which face a significant migration situation in the coming year.

  • A proposal for an EU Council implementing act, setting the number of relocations and the amount of financial contributions for the coming year under the solidarity mechanism.

This means that the European Commission’s decision on a country’s status will only be valid for one year.

The minimum numbers set in the Pact are 30,000 relocations and €600,000 in financial contributions, but the Commission can propose higher minimum thresholds in any given year, depending on the migration situation.

The Commission is aware that these numbers might be hard to achieve, as countries might prefer to ‘buy their way out’ of relocation rather than accept refugees. However, the minimum ‘solidarity of people’ must amount to 60% of the total relocation numbers set in the Council’s annual solidarity pool decision, or 30,000 relocations, whichever is higher.

What Happens Next?

EU countries facing migratory pressure can receive support in the form of relocation, financial contributions, or alternative solidarity measures (staff and material aid). They can also be granted a full or partial deduction of their pledged solidarity contributions.

Countries in a significant migration situation can only benefit from a partial or full deduction of their pledged solidarity contributions.

If the European Commission decides that Poland is in a significant migration situation, the Polish government will have to submit a formal request to the KE with the relevant information.

What if the KE doesn’t agree with us? Then we can challenge the Commission’s initial decision, but we would be obliged to provide much more detailed information, sufficiently justifying why we face a significant migration situation. The KE will then assess this information and decide if our arguments are sufficient.

Finally, if the Commission agrees that we are indeed in a significant migration situation, the EU Council will exempt us from part or all of the ‘solidarity contribution.’

Written by

Shape the conversation

Do you have anything to add to this story? Any ideas for interviews or angles we should explore? Let us know if you’d like to write a follow-up, a counterpoint, or share a similar story.

Write a counterargument article Write a related article