Migrant quotas - infringement procedure against the Czech Republic

Following the putting off of the Dublin III Regulation, the EU’s top court ruled that “member states would be forced to accept thousands of asylum seekers under a compulsory quota system.”* If quotas proved to be the right step, wouldn’t there still be someone supporting them now, three years later? How can then the Czech Republic in particular be sued today for not fulfilling an already ineffective system?

QUOTAS: an unsurprising finish for an unpromising start

The Czech Republic opposed the mandatory quota system since its very beginning in 2015. At that time, at the peak of the migrant crisis, the EU’s top court ruled that member states would be forced to accept thousands of asylum seekers under a compulsory quota system. While the majority of the European Commission backed the system, some countries were still arguing they were not equipped for such radical change. Having to integrate people from mainly Muslim countries represented for Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Romania a big issue, because they claimed not to be fully equipped to welcome refugees. Those countries that voted against the system had to implement the common scheme nevertheless or face charges. This means that the decision to mandatorily provide asylum to a predetermined number of refugees didn’t originate in any part from inside the Czech Republic.
For its strong disagreement with the quotas that is now shared by the majority of member states, the Czech Republic shouldn’t be sued as a country committing an offence. When the quota system proved ineffective in reaching its target of refugee redistribution, the EU upheld the Dublin regulation. Bohuslav Sobotka, the Czech Prime Minister at the time even stated that if necessary, the Czech Republic will defend itself at judicial institutions rather than to support “dysfunctional quotas”.** Outvoted, unsatisfied and presented in bad light: that is not how the Czech Republic wants to be remembered.

Easy to say, hard to do

Unlike the other countries that are being sued by the European Commission with the same charge, the Czech Republic has accepted at least some refugees. Poland, for instance, has not taken any relocating actions since December 2015 and moreover, has voted in favor of the quota plan. Considering the size of the Czech Republic, it seems like accepting at least 12 refugees and others from the total of 1445 asylum seekers that applied in 2017 was a very small, but still a symbolic step toward European solidarity. In return, a mutual respect would be expected. In fact, the Czech immigration system is one of the least adapted to work with large numbers. It is a lengthy process of questioning, tests, family tracking and therefore takes several months to undergo.
The European Council gave one month to the Czech Republic before taking it to court, in order to respond. Interestingly enough, the custom is to give a two-month deadline and so when no reply was received, the tensions only ascended. Lack of transparency of the process is definitely another one of the key issues that worsens the situation, but doesn’t justify the charges.

Risk of CZEXIT: pressure that we do not need

Actions speak louder than words and when Czechs had Parliamentary elections, their fear of immigrants proved crucial. As already mentioned, the Czech Republic accepted 12 refugees in total - a number so small that meetings through social networks are organized for the public to actually see them. However, the small amount didn’t prevent almost 11% of the entire population from voting for extreme right parties in the past Parliamentary election in October 2017. In particular, a party with the slogan “NO to immigrants” called SPD now holds 22 out of the 200 seats in the Parliament, exceeding the number of refugees accepted. Any extra pressure from the EU therefore only strengthens the dislike of the institution in the country.
Following the model of Great Britain that has voted to leave the EU and abandoned its asylum policy after the referendum, what happens if the Czech Republic manages to exempt itself from the scheme as well? Taking into consideration that the most pro-EU party TOP 09 reached just above the level of entry to the Parliament (5%), in order to uphold the EU’s position in the nation, it seems wiser to ask for lowering its demands than to push on already warm ground.
To sum up, it seems like the approach of the Czech Republic is lacking support of other EU member states and that is why the Republic is now facing charges for things that it didn’t agree to in the first place. Last, it was once again Bohuslav Sobotka – the former opponent of the quota system – who warned against the drop in confidence in the EU among the population, three years ago. Since that, not much has changed on the inside of the country and every disagreement is one more reason for a radical intervention. To prevent such downslide, the European Commission should drop the charges against the Czech Republic and welcome further changes on their immigration policy.

*https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/06/eu-court-rejects-refugee-quota-challenge-hungary-slovakia/
**https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/13/eu-takes-action-against-eastern-states-for-refusing-to-take-refugees