The EU’s Migration Reform in Action: Exclusion, Detention, and Deportation

Usually, we don’t write about policies and laws in detail. Our work is grounded in what we hear directly from people. But the stories we hear every day are already showing the real-life impact of the New EU Pact on Migration and Asylum, even before its full implementation.

Behind the legal language of “screening,” “solidarity,” and “crisis management,” this reform package is reshaping the way Europe treats people on the move, and institutionalizes deportation, detention and the lack of access to asylum.

That’s why we feel it’s important to break down what these new rules actually mean - not in theory, but in practice.

Background and Reform Process:

The question of migration management and asylum has been at the centre of political debate in the European Union for well over a decade. The EU’s attempts to build a coherent Common European Asylum System (CEAS) took shape in the early 2010s, with a set of Directives and Regulations adopted in 2013. These were meant to harmonize how EU Member States handle asylum applications, reception conditions, and responsibility-sharing.

However, in 2015, when thousands of people arrived on the shores of Greece, Italy, and other border countries, the system’s deep flaws were laid bare. What the EU called a “refugee crisis” was, in reality, a crisis of solidarity and political will. Recognition rates varied dramatically from one country to another; border states were left to shoulder most of the responsibility; and people seeking protection were met with undignified reception conditions and increasingly violent border practices.

In 2016, even the European Commission admitted what the civil society organizations filling in the systematic gaps on the ground had long known: Europe’s asylum system was failing. What was meant to ensure protection and solidarity had instead become a mix of unlivable reception conditions, unequal treatment, and avoiding responsibility. The EU launched yet another reform process, full of debates and promises of change - but after years of political tensions, nothing truly changed. Divisions between Member States made progress impossible, and the reform that was meant to fix a broken system was simply left unfinished.

In 2020, the Commission revived the stalled reform through a new legislative package, merging previous proposals on reception conditions, qualification standards, and asylum procedures. By 2022, political agreement was reached on ten files - one Directive and nine Regulations - forming what is now known as the New Pact on Migration and Asylum. Officially adopted in June 2024, the Pact allows an adaptation period until 2026 for Member States to align their national systems. Its stated goals are to strengthen control at external borders, prevent secondary movements, and promote solidarity in responsibility-sharing.

In reality, however, the Pact represents something very different: instead of fixing a broken system to guarantee safety, fairness, and protection, it institutionalizes detention, erodes the right to asylum, and outsources Europe’s responsibilities beyond its borders.

In the next sections, we will explore the main components of the Pact that will have the most impact on how we show up in solidarity for the communities we serve.

Screening Regulation: What happens when someone arrives at the EU external borders?

The Screening Regulation is the EU’s first step in the New Pact on Migration and Asylum, turning borders into mandatory control zones where every person arriving irregularly is treated as a potential threat before they are recognized as someone seeking protection.

The Regulation introduces a mandatory procedure for all people arriving irregularly at the EU’s external borders, a process inspired by the “hotspot” approach first implemented in Greece and Italy. Every person, regardless of their background or reason for arrival, must now undergo the same set of security, identity, and health checks before being allowed to enter the asylum system. The regulation extends the hotspot approach EU-wide, meaning that what was once an emergency measure in Greece and Italy is now becoming standard across the continent. Every individual arriving at an external border is treated first as a potential risk, rather than as someone seeking protection.This system transforms borders into filtering zones where the presumption of innocence and the right to protection are erased. People are reduced to security cases before they are recognised as human beings in need of safety.

The regulation also blurs the distinction between asylum seekers and other people. Practically, everyone is subject to the same security checks, with no immediate pathway to apply for asylum, undermining the fundamental right guaranteed by international law. Essentially erasing legal distinctions at the first interaction, the EU is prioritizing border control over human lives, treating asylum seekers as administrative problems rather than people fleeing danger.

The regulation sets maximum durations for screening: 7 days at external borders, 3 days on the territory, and 4 days for unaccompanied minors. While these limits may seem short, in practice people often face prolonged confinement in overcrowded facilities with little access to support, and no accountability. Even temporary deprivation of liberty can have long-lasting effects on people, particularly for children.

The screening also will be conducted by screening staff, often border police, to determine whether someone enters the asylum procedure at all. This hands life-changing power to law enforcement rather than trained asylum lawyers, undermining fairness and justice at the very first step of the asylum process. Access to procedural safeguards is also limited, with no formal decisions that can be appealed.

Another troubling feature is the “fiction of non-entry”. Individuals are considered to be physically on EU territory but without the legal right to remain. This allows Member States to restrict movement, carry out push backs in silence or detain people who would otherwise not be held. This is a legal loophole that normalizes detention and strips people of freedom from the very moment they arrive. Safety and liberty are now secondary to control.

The regulation also encourages multipurpose centers that combine screening, asylum processing, detention, and deportation. Examples like ongoing construction of Vastria CCAC in Greece show how this model encourages de-facto detention for everyone, including children.

The screening regulation is overall extremely alarming, as people will have limited access to information on the procedures and almost no access to legal aid, whilst the states can proceed to deport and push back people in silence.

Asylum Procedures Regulation: What happens when someone is “allowed” to apply for asylum?

The Asylum Procedures Regulation (APR) is the next step in the EU’s “border-first” approach, designed to make the asylum process faster, more rigid, and more focused on controlling who enters the system rather than protecting those in need. Its stated goal is to harmonize procedures across Member States, but in practice, it prioritizes speed over fairness, and efficiency over human dignity.

The APR introduces accelerated and border procedures, which are mandatory for anyone arriving irregularly (so essentially almost everyone who gets access to apply to asylum through the screening procedure) or coming from countries with low recognition rates for asylum. This is deeply problematic because recognition rates vary widely across Europe. A person’s claim could be considered “fast-track” in one country, and entirely normal in another, creating unequal treatment and the real risk of wrongful refusals.

Each Member State must maintain significant capacity for border procedures, ranging from 300 to 6,000 places, with an EU-wide total of almost 30,000. This ensures that the infrastructure is in place to process people quickly - but often at the cost of meaningful access to justice, safety, and protection.

The APR also expands the concept of “safe third countries.” The European Commission has proposed an initial EU list of safe countries of origin - including Bangladesh, Colombia, Egypt, Kosovo, India, and Morocco - meaning that people arriving from these places face fast-track procedures or even expedited rejection. The danger is clear: the EU and member states are effectively deciding whose story and experience counts as legit, whose does not, putting people’s lives at risk based on political and administrative convenience, as well as violating its obligations under the Refugee Convention.

Accelerated procedures are designed to complete a full asylum process within three months. While this may seem efficient on paper, it hides a major risk: vulnerabilities such as experiences of torture, human trafficking, or gender-based violence are often overlooked. The regulation mandates the right to free legal counseling, but does not set minimum standards, leaving interpretation to individual Member States. In practice, this will make access to legal support inconsistent, and many people may face the system alone, with no ability to challenge wrongful decisions.

Reception Conditions Directive: What life looks like inside the system?

The Reception Conditions Directive governs the everyday life of people seeking asylum once they are allowed to enter the system. On paper, the new Directive promises more material support, dignified living conditions - but in practice, it creates a precarious existence defined by uncertainty, dependency, and control with the other parts of the EU Pact combined.

The Directive expands the scenarios under which reception can be withdrawn. For example, people whose cases fall under Dublin transfers may have their accommodation or support withdrawn even if the transfer is not immediately implemented. This leaves people in legal limbo, with states able to interpret “dignified conditions” however they wish - often resulting in people being left without shelter and other basic services.

Access to the labor market is largely denied for applicants in accelerated procedures - which, given the widespread use of fast-track processes, effectively blocks the majority of people from working while their asylum claims are being assessed. In Greece, this is particularly devastating, as the country historically allowed asylum seekers to work while waiting for asylum decisions. The new rules erase that possibility, forcing people into dependency and vulnerability.

Detention and freedom of movement are also redefined. Screening and border procedures can now detain people while labeling it a “restriction of movement,” exploiting vague guidelines that exempt facilities from monitoring. This legal sleight-of-hand normalizes detention and obscures accountability, turning temporary screening into prolonged confinement for many.

Access for NGOs is limited in practice, particularly in remote or newly built screening and reception centers. This reduces independent oversight.

**Photo**: Graftiti in Greece, Velar Grant

Asylum and Migration Management Regulation: How the EU Avoids Responsibility?

The Asylum and Migration Management Regulation (AMMR) reinforce the EU’s “border-first” approach while shifting the burden onto frontline states. The AMMR replaces the Dublin Regulation, clarifying which Member State handles an application and strengthening solidarity mechanisms - but mostly through financial contributions or relocation, meaning border countries like Greece, Italy, and Spain continue to shoulder the heaviest responsibility. Even before the fully expected implementation there are already tensions and debates between member states regarding the “solidarity” mechanism.

The regulation essentially institutionalizes mechanisms that let the EU avoid responsibility for protection, leaving frontline states - and the people arriving at their borders - to bear the human cost.

Future Implementation: What’s Coming Next?

The New Pact on Migration and Asylum will fully take effect in June–July 2026, meaning all asylum applications will be processed under the new rules. Other than the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum, the EU Commission has also proposed a Return Regulation, which builds on the Asylum Procedures Regulation by expanding safe countries of origin, introducing more flexible connection criteria, and creating return hubs. Not all elements are expected to be fully operational by July 2026, and the European Commission has shown limited concern about enforcement.

In practice, the New Pact on Migration and Asylum is not a reform, it’s a weaponization of policy. Behind the language of efficiency, solidarity, and border management lies a system built to exclude, detain, and deport. It doesn’t fix what was broken, as it legalizes the violence that has been happening for years at Europe’s borders.

We already see it everywhere we operate - in violent push backs, in the expansion in detention happening quietly and in the deaths and disappearances we hear about. These are not accidents or “tragic consequences” of a flawed system; they are the direct results of deliberate political choices. Choices that prioritize deterrence over protection, and control over compassion.

This Pact gives those choices legal cover. It turns border violence into policy, detention into “management,” and asylum into a privilege reserved for the few who survive the system long enough to claim it.

We usually speak about people, not policies - but this Pact is about people. It is about every person who will be denied the right to safety, every person who will disappear in the detention center, and every person who will be pushed back into danger because Europe decided their life wasn’t worth protecting.

As this Pact moves toward full implementation in 2026, our role is clear: to resist the normalization of cruelty, to expose the violence it enables, and to stand in solidarity with those who refuse to be erased by it.

Because this is not just about laws - it’s about lives. And we will not be silent while Europe builds its future on the logic of disposability.

Words by Anna Gruber, Advocacy Mangaer

Collective AidNovember 8, 2025