class=”sc-29f61514-0 dXbCZE”>
Italy wants to transfer up to 39,000 migrants to Albania. And that’s before they’ve even touched Italian soil. In concrete terms, refugees rescued by the coast guard in the Mediterranean Sea will be taken to an Albanian port. They could apply for asylum there and, if the decision was positive, they could travel to Italy.
For now it’s an agreement. How the project will actually be implemented remains unclear. The necessary asylum centers also have to be built in Albania. But Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni (46) has already spoken of a ‘historic pact’. But can he really defuse Europe’s migration problem?
“I don’t understand Italy’s goal,” says Center State Councilor Marianne Binder-Keller (65). The deal does draw attention to the problems Italy is facing. But in the end, the refugees still remained under Italian responsibility, simply in another country.
FDP wants functioning repatriation
That is exactly what Damian Müller (39) finds promising. According to the FDP Council of States, the migrants do not want to go to Albania, but to Europe. “As a result, the agreement could slow down migration from North Africa to Italy,” he says.
Because only migrants rescued in the Mediterranean are transferred to Albania and Switzerland has no access to the sea, it is difficult to adapt the agreement to Switzerland. Instead, Müller expects Asylum Minister Elisabeth Baume-Schneider (59) to be more courageous in other areas. “A functioning return system prevents economic migrants from seeking asylum in Switzerland,” he says.
However, repatriation is often difficult. Certain states refuse to take back citizens who have been forcibly returned. As a result, many remain in Switzerland even if the asylum decision is negative. To change this, Müller submitted a proposal at the beginning of 2023. He advocates a pilot project that would make it possible to transfer rejected people to a third country. “Albania should also be considered in this context,” says the FDP Council of States.
Make Switzerland unattractive
The SVP has been discussing the establishment of asylum centers in third countries – for example in Rwanda – for some time. However, more questions would arise here: for example, who is responsible for care or what rights would apply within the center? SVP faction leader Thomas Aeschi (44) makes no secret of the fact that his party is concerned with deterrence. “We must make Switzerland less attractive as an asylum country.”
Aeschi finds the Italian asylum deal welcome: “Asylum applications will therefore be processed outside the Schengen area, and that is positive.” This means that rejected asylum seekers cannot simply travel further within the Schengen area.
“This violates fundamental rights”
The SP, on the other hand, describes Italy’s plans as a ‘populist pseudo-solution’ and ‘symbolic politics’. Meloni only does this because she promised an extremely strict migration policy during the election campaign. “But outsourcing asylum processes to the external border does not work,” emphasizes Céline Widmer (45). This has already become apparent in the case of England, which wanted to deport refugees to Rwanda, but so far without success.
Moreover, this project contradicts the basic principles of the Refugee Convention. Because the refugees in the reception centers would probably not be protected. “There are overcrowded camps where people live in precarious conditions,” says Widmer. And: “This is inhumane, violates fundamental rights and contradicts a humanitarian tradition.”
To solve the migration problem, safe escape routes are needed – and not a deterrent exercise, says the SP Councilor. (rba)
Source:Blick
I am Liam Livingstone and I work in a news website. My main job is to write articles for the 24 Instant News. My specialty is covering politics and current affairs, which I’m passionate about. I have worked in this field for more than 5 years now and it’s been an amazing journey. With each passing day, my knowledge increases as well as my experience of the world we live in today.
