A Critical View of the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum

SERIES: EU Pact on Migration and Asylum

The EU Pact on Migration and Asylum is presented by the European Union as a major reform of the European asylum system. Its official objective is to make migration management more efficient, predictable and harmonised across Member States. However, from a human rights perspective, the Pact raises serious concerns.

In a statement published on 10 June 2026, the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) warned that the Pact may restrict access to asylum, reduce fundamental rights guarantees and keep people in need of protection at the EU’s external borders. This criticism is particularly important because ECRE works closely with civil society organisations, lawyers and actors involved in asylum systems across Europe.

Implementation Plan for the Pact on Migration and Asylum (Source: European Commission Migration and Home Affairs)

A system focused on control rather than protection

One of the main criticisms of the Pact is that it shifts the focus of EU asylum policy from protection to border control. The new system is built around faster identification, screening, border procedures and return. In theory, this should make the system more efficient. In practice, however, it may make access to asylum more difficult.

The Pact creates a framework in which many people arriving at the EU’s external borders may be channelled into accelerated procedures. These procedures are designed to decide quickly whether a person can enter the regular asylum system or should be returned. The problem is that asylum claims are often complex. People fleeing persecution, war, torture or gender-based violence may need time to explain their situation, gather evidence and access legal advice.

If speed becomes the priority, there is a real risk that individual protection needs will not be properly identified.

Complex rules and unequal implementation

Another important concern is the complexity of the Pact. Although many of its instruments are regulations and are therefore directly applicable in Member States, ECRE notes that the rules remain highly complex and sometimes unclear. This may lead to different interpretations from one Member State to another.

This is a major problem. One of the goals of the Pact is to create a more harmonised European asylum system. But if Member States interpret and apply the rules differently, the system may remain fragmented. Asylum seekers may face different levels of protection depending on the country in which they arrive.

The risk of punitive implementation

ECRE also warns that several Member States appear to be taking a partial approach to implementation. According to the organisation, some states are focusing on restrictive or punitive measures, such as detention, while failing to properly invest in safeguards.

This is one of the most serious risks of the Pact. A system that increases control measures without strengthening rights protections can easily become unfair. For example, if Member States expand detention but do not provide effective vulnerability assessments, children, victims of trafficking, survivors of torture or people with mental health problems may be placed in inappropriate conditions.

The Pact can only be fair if safeguards are real in practice, not just written in legislation.

Legal counselling and access to justice

The Pact introduces the idea of legal counselling, but ECRE notes that the term is not clearly defined. This creates uncertainty about who will provide it, how it will be funded and whether it will be independent.

Access to legal advice is essential in asylum procedures. Many applicants do not understand the legal system, the deadlines, or the evidence required to support their claim. Without proper legal support, the right to asylum becomes much harder to exercise.

There is also a concern about conflicts of interest. If state authorities are both managing the asylum procedure and providing legal counselling, applicants may not receive truly independent advice. For legal counselling to be effective, it must be accessible, independent and properly funded.

Limited appeals and risk of removal

A fair asylum system must include an effective right to appeal. However, ECRE warns that the right to appeal may be limited in several situations under the Pact, including in relation to screening outcomes.

This is particularly worrying where appeals do not have automatic suspensive effect. In simple terms, this means that a person could risk being removed before their appeal has been properly examined. Such a situation would increase the risk of violations of the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits returning someone to a country where they may face persecution, torture or serious harm.

Fast procedures may be useful from an administrative point of view, but they should never undermine access to justice.

The EU Pact on Migration and Asylum is meant to create a more efficient and harmonised asylum system. However, its implementation raises serious concerns. As ECRE argues, the Pact risks restricting access to asylum, weakening fundamental rights guarantees and keeping people at the EU’s external borders.

The main problem is not only the text of the Pact, but also how Member States choose to apply it. If they focus mainly on detention, border control and returns, while neglecting legal assistance, vulnerability assessments, reception conditions and independent monitoring, the Pact may deepen the existing problems of the European asylum system.