The new screening and border procedures: towards a seamless migration process

This policy study focuses on screening, border asylum processing, and border return procedures following the newly adopted reforms introduced by the New Pact on Migration and Asylum. These three stages are part of the Pact's revamped procedural set-up, which is meant to streamline, simplify, and harmonise procedural arrangements in the reformed Common European Asylum System (CEAS). They are governed respectively by the new Screening Regulation, the Asylum Procedures Regulation (APR), and Border Return Procedure Regulation (BRPR). They are also supported by EURODAC, a database containing biometric data of applicants for international protection and persons apprehended in connection with an irregular crossing of the external borders of member states. Screening, border asylum processing, and border return procedures are meant to make up a new seamless process at the EU's external borders. Creating a seamless border migration process is not inherently negative, as it reflects the intricate links between different policies and operational needs, especially in border areas and in light of mixed migration flows and irregular arrivals. As early as 2007, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) voiced the need for differentiation between categories of persons making up mixed flows, swift identification at the external borders, and referral to an appropriate procedure through its so-called Ten Point Plan. Challenges with the Pact's approach to a seamless migration process may, however, arise for several reasons. These include curtailed procedural guarantees, also in what concerns the right to an effective remedy, short processing times, inadequate material conditions, both in general and concerning the needs of vulnerable groups, inability to provide services in remote locations, prioritising efficiency over the quality of processing, and finally, excessive recourse to deprivation of liberty and restrictions to freedom of movement. After introducing the regulations' basic novelties, this policy study reflects on the implications and operationalisation of the new rules, exploring these and further challenges. The concluding section highlights forward-looking reflections for the implementation stage of this new three-stage process, considering such challenges. These reflections pay attention to the notion of 'adequate capacity', the issue of financial support, the regulation of and limits to deprivation of liberty, the implementation and impact of vulnerability assessment, as well as the operationalisation of the right to an effective remedy and the set-up of monitoring of fundamental rights violations.