June, 20 2011, 10:50am EDT

EU: Put Rights at Heart of Migration Policy
Council Summit Should Endorse Approach Based on Human Rights Obligations
BRUSSELS
European Union (EU) heads of state meeting in Brussels later this week should put human rights at the heart of EU migration and asylum policy, Human Rights Watch said today. Migration is high on the agenda for the European Council summit on June 23 and 24, 2011, with external border control, free movement inside the EU, the Common European Asylum system, and migration cooperation with North Africa expected to be discussed. The European Council meeting comes at a critical moment, Human Rights Watch said. Upheaval in North Africa has brought thousands of migrants and asylum seekers to European shores, and led to growing numbers of migrant deaths at sea. Efforts to reform common asylum rules and enhance solidarity within the EU remain largely stalled, while an emphasis on border enforcement has come at the expense of protecting migrants' rights and access to asylum.
"The EU talks a lot these days about promoting its values in the Middle East and North Africa," said Judith Sunderland, senior Western Europe researcher at Human Rights Watch. "But when it comes to migrants and asylum seekers, those values are all too often thrown out the window."
The EU currently falls short in five key areas that undermine its obligations to protect asylum seekers and migrants, Human Rights Watch said:
- The failure to reform the Dublin regulation, which requires asylum claims to be heard in the first EU state a migrant reaches. This places a disproportionate burden on states at the EU's external borders, including Greece, which has a broken asylum system.
- The continued asylum crisis and the inhuman and degrading detention conditions for migrants in Greece, with EU assistance focused more on securing its border with Turkey than ensuring humane treatment for migrants.
- Insufficient efforts to prevent the deaths at sea of boat migrants fleeing Libya and other parts of North Africa. As many as 1,500 migrants have died trying to cross to Europe during the first six months of 2011.
- Limited resettlement by EU countries of refugees from North Africa, while Egypt and Tunisia continue to host hundreds of thousands.
- The use of readmission agreements, which facilitate the return of migrants and asylum seekers entering the EU to transit countries - such as Ukraine - that lack the will or capacity to guarantee them access to asylum and to treat them humanely.
The Dublin II Regulation
The council is expected to consider commission proposals to revise several parts of the common asylum system, including the Reception Directive, which covers assistance to asylum seekers, and the Procedures Directive, which deals with asylum procedures.
But efforts to reformthe Dublin II regulation, based on the flawed premise that all EU member states share common standards and capacity to process and host asylum seekers fairly, remain stalled because of opposition from many EU governments, particularly those in the north that benefit from the status quo. In practice, it means that EU states at the front line face an unfair burden of having to process the claims of almost all migrant arrivals by land and sea, even if their asylum systems are not up to the task, Human Rights Watch said.
The Asylum Crisis in Greece
The asylum crisis in Greece vividly illustrates the regulation's shortcomings, Human Rights Watch said. Because of Greece's location, more than three-quarters of irregular migrants entering the EU by land in 2010 came through Greece. The UN refugee agency, UNHCR, has described the situation in Greece for migrants and asylum seekers as a "humanitarian crisis." Greece approved only 11 out of the first 30,000 asylum applications received in 2010. The asylum backlog currently stands at around 47,000 cases, and reforms to the Greek asylum process are slow. Meanwhile, thousands of migrants and asylum seekers in Greece face routine detention in conditions that have been held by the European Court of Human Rights to be inhuman and degrading.
In January, the court ruled that Greece's broken asylum system and detention conditions meant that Belgium's transfer of an Afghan asylum seeker to Greece in 2009 had breached the prohibition on ill-treatment and had denied him an effective remedy. At least eight countries have already suspended transfers to Greece under the Dublin regulation as a result.
Commission pressure helped push Greece to reform its asylum system. In November 2010, the EU border agency, Frontex, sent border guards from other EU states to help reinforce Greece's land-border with Turkey - along which Greek police stopped over 47,000 migrants and asylum seekers trying to enter Greece in 2010. But the EU has done little to tackle the abusive detention conditions faced by migrants who reach Greece.
"The EU seems to be far more concerned with keeping migrants and asylum seekers out of Greece, and out of Europe, than in the rights of those already there," Sunderland said. "If the EU is serious in its commitment to the right to seek asylum, it needs to fix the Dublin rule and help Greece end its abusive detention of migrants."
Deaths at Sea
Ensuring access to international protection in Europe also means doing much more to prevent deaths at sea, Human Rights Watch said. As many as 1,500 people have died in the Mediterranean since the beginning of the year in desperate attempts to reach European shores. Scores have died in reported shipwrecks and capsizings, most recently over 200 off the coast of Tunisia in early June, with hundreds more unaccounted for and presumed dead. Reports that military ships in the Mediterranean allegedly failed to assist a drifting boat in late March and early April, leading to the death of 63 sub-Saharan Africans from thirst and hunger, are particularly disturbing and underscore the need for a concerted and principled EU response to boat migration, Human Rights Watch said.
All ships in the Mediterranean should rescue overcrowded migrant boats without hesitation, and heed UNHCR's call to presumptively treat all of these boats as needing rescue, rather than waiting until they are in distress, Human Rights Watch said. Italy and Malta need to step up their vital operations at sea, intensifying efforts to identify boats before they are in distress and accompany them to safe harbors.
European countries should also conduct sea evacuations of the most vulnerable civilians trapped in Libya, Human Rights Watch said. With Tunisia and Egypt already hosting hundreds of thousands of Libyans and others fleeing Libya, European countries should show solidarity by evacuating some of those trapped in Libya to Europe, where they should have access to asylum or temporary protection.
"If hundreds of people were dying on land instead of at sea, EU governments would call for common action," Sunderland said. "Stepped up rescue operations could literally save hundreds of lives."
Refugee Resettlement Needs
The EU should also increase its efforts to resettle recognizedrefugeesfrom North Africa and elsewhere, by increasing national quotas and moving swiftly to put plans for a joint European resettlement program into operation. So far, European countries have offered to resettle some 700 refugees from North Africa and to relocate over 300 asylum seekers from Malta, reflecting the burden faced by the tiny island nation of arrivals by sea.
Only 14 European countries have resettlement programs, including Iceland and Norway, which are not EU members. Globally, only 6 percent of resettled refugees end up in Europe. About 90 percent go to the United States, Canada, and Australia.
Readmission Agreements
Enhancing control of Europe's external borders is also on the agenda at the European Council meeting. A core part of the EU migration control strategy depends on readmission agreements, which facilitate deportation of migrants to the neighboring and other countries through which they travelled to enter the EU.
Returns under such agreements are only supposed to take place after asylum claims have been considered. Yet Human Rights Watch research for a December 2010 report has shown that migrants returned to Ukraine from Slovakia and Hungary under readmission agreements were unable to claim asylum before being removed, and then faced abuse in Ukraine.
More than half had been beaten and some credibly alleged they had been subject to torture in Ukraine. Most said the Slovak and Hungarian authorities had ignored their requests to apply for asylum. The report also found that Ukraine's system was completely dysfunctional, unable to grant asylum to those found to be refugees. It also found that both Slovakia and Hungary had expelled unaccompanied migrant children to Ukraine, which lacks any special protection for them.
In a report in February, the European Commission acknowledged the potential for rights violations under readmission agreements and said it would monitor the treatment of those returned and hold member states who return migrants to abuse to account. The report's proposal for a pilot post-return monitoring mechanism for Ukraine is positive, Human Rights Watch said. But the conclusion that the return of third country migrants to Ukraine "has worked" flies in the face of significant evidence that returnees face ill-treatment.
"Before returning anyone to a transit country, EU governments should be sure the person doesn't need asylum and that they won't face abuse there," Sunderland said. "The commission should make sure that agreements with third countries have robust human rights protections and are subject to scrutiny and, if necessary, suspension."
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
LATEST NEWS
'We Will Not Accept This Intimidation,' Mamdani Says of Trump Threat to Arrest Him
"That Trump included praise for Eric Adams in his authoritarian threats is unsurprising, but highlights the urgency of bringing an end to this mayor's time in City Hall," said the New York City mayoral candidate.
Jul 01, 2025
Democratic New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani made clear on Tuesday that he would not be intimidated by Republican U.S. President Donald Trump's threat to arrest him.
A journalist who falsely described Mamdani—a democratic socialist—as a "communist" asked Trump about the candidate's pledge not to cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), whose agents are working to carry out the president's promised mass deportations.
"Well then, we'll have to arrest him," said Trump, a former New Yorker who has taken aim at Mamdani since his victory in last Tuesday's Democratic primary. "Look, we don't need a communist in this country."
Mamdani, who currently serves in the New York State Assembly, was born in Uganda to Indian parents and moved to NYC as a child. He was naturalized as a U.S. citizen in 2018. Throughout his campaign, the 33-year-old has faced numerous Islamophobic attacks, and after his primary win, Congressman Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) urged the Trump administration to target him with "denaturalization proceedings," in line with a broader effort at the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Trump said Tuesday that his administration would be watching Mamdani "very carefully." The president, a well-documented liar, added that "a lot of people are saying he's here illegally—you know, we're gonna look at everything... and ideally he's gonna turn out to be much less than a communist, but right now he's a communist, that's not a socialist."
Trump also blasted Congressman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), a supporter of Mamdani, and praised the city's current mayor, Eric Adams, who is seeking another term as an Independent. After Trump returned to office in January, the DOJ instructed prosecutors to drop federal corruption charges against Adams, triggering widespread outrage over the attempted "illegal quid pro quo," as some critics called it.
Responding to Trump's remarks in a lengthy statement, Mamdani said Tuesday that "the president of the United States just threatened to have me arrested, stripped of my citizenship, put in a detention camp, and deported. Not because I have broken any law, but because I will refuse to let ICE terrorize our city."
"His statements don't just represent an attack on our democracy but an attempt to send a message to every New Yorker who refuses to hide in the shadows: If you speak up, they will come for you," Mamdani continued. "We will not accept this intimidation."
"That Trump included praise for Eric Adams in his authoritarian threats is unsurprising, but highlights the urgency of bringing an end to this mayor's time in City Hall," he asserted, directing attention to the GOP budget bill advanced by the U.S. Senate on Tuesday.
Mamdani said that "at this very moment, when MAGA Republicans are attempting to destroy the social safety net, kick millions of New Yorkers off of healthcare, and enrich their billionaire donors at the expense of working families, it is a scandal that Eric Adams echoes this president's division, distraction, and hatred. Voters will resoundingly reject it in November."
In addition to Mamdani and Adams, the general election candidates are Republican Curtis Sliwa, Independent Jim Walden, and disgraced former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who is now running as an Independent after losing the Democratic primary. According to results released Tuesday, Mamdani got 56% of the vote compared to Cuomo's 44%.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Senators Demand Answers About 'Reckless' Trump Admin Use of AI Social Security Chatbot
Artificial intelligence systems, the four senators argue, "represent a troubling pattern that if continued, would significantly impede Americans' ability" to access their benefits.
Jul 01, 2025
Four U.S. senators—three Democrats and Vermont Independent Bernie Sanders—demanded answers Tuesday from the Trump administration about its "reckless rollout" of artificial intelligence chatbot technology into phone systems "that have blocked people from accessing their earned Social Security benefits."
"These AI programs, which the agency deployed with little consultation with Congress, advocates, or other key stakeholders, appear to have been developed in haste and represent a troubling pattern that if continued, would significantly impede Americans' ability to access their Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits," the senators said in a letter to Social Security Administration (SSA) Commissioner Frank Bisignano.
While Sanders, Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (Ore.), and Sens. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) acknowledged that "AI can be a helpful tool to simplify some workloads," they contended that artificial intelligence "is not a panacea for all challenges facing SSA."
The letter continues:
SSA is entrusted with ensuring accurate and timely payment of mtore than $1 trillion in Social Security and SSI benefit payments to over 73 million seniors, individuals with disabilities, and their families each year. Considering the agency's important mission, it is critical that SSA is responsibly deploying any technology system, including AI. For example, whether incorporating newer technology like generative AI to improve customer experience and increase efficiency or leveraging predictive AI to provide disability examiners support in the disability determination process, it is critical that SSA meaningfully engage stakeholders, including its customers and employees, the advocacy community, and members of Congress, throughout the entire process to avoid harm to claimants and beneficiaries.
"The agency's hasty AI rollouts on its national 1-800 number phone system and the phone system for its 1,200 field offices, which resulted in significant impediments for Americans simply trying to access their earned benefits, demonstrate our concern," the senators wrote. "In April, SSA announced it would be deploying an anti-fraud AI algorithm to verify the identity of callers seeking to file for benefits on its national 1-800 number, arguing—without providing any evidence—that its telephone service was rife with fraud."
"However," the lawmakers noted, "the proposal was scrapped shortly after implementation after the system found it identified two claims out of over 110,000 as potentially fraudulent. Moreover, the new program slowed claim processing by 25% and led to a 'degradation of public service.'"
The senators are asking Bisignano to:
- Provide a detailed description of the new AI-based chatbot, including how it determines whether it has successfully answered a caller's questions before hanging up;
- Describe which metrics is SSA using to determine whether this AI-based chatbot is successful at improving service delivery at the national 1-800 number;
- Explain the metrics SSA used to evaluate the successes or challenges of this AI-based chatbot before rolling it out nationwide to field offices;
- Disclose which stakeholders, especially those who represent beneficiaries and employees, were consulted pre- and post-deployment of this AI-based chatbot;
- Explain whether SSA is planning to procure, develop, or implement any new AI systems this year; and
- If the answer to the above question is yes, list and provide a detailed description of these AI systems.
The AI rollout is part of Bisignano's "technology agenda" to boost productivity at SSA amid staffing and other cuts implemented by the Trump administration and its Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. In February, SSA announced its intent to fire 7,000 workers, or about 12% of its historically low staff.
Many SSA staffers also resigned, including nearly half of the agency's senior executives. This has adversely affected SSA beneficiaries. An analysis published last week by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities revealed that one SSA staff member must now serve 1,480 beneficiaries—over three times as many as in 1967.
Last week, Warren sent a letter to Bisignano—who one advocacy group described as "a Wall Street CEO with a long history of slashing the companies he runs to the bone"—accusing him of misleading the public about longer beneficiary wait times resulting from the Trump administration and DOGE taking a "chainsaw to Social Security."
Keep ReadingShow Less
House to Take Up GOP Megabill Serving 'Oil Company CEOs, Hedge Fund Donors, and Climate Deniers'
"Senate Republicans advanced the most anti-environment, anti-job, and anti-American bill in history," said one campaigner.
Jul 01, 2025
After U.S. Senate Republicans on Tuesday sent President Donald Trump's so-called "Big Beautiful Bill" back to the House of Representatives, defenders of the planet sounded the alarm on several provisions that remain in the massive budget reconciliation package.
"This is a vote that will live in infamy," said Greenpeace USA deputy climate program director John Noël after Vice President JD Vance broke a tie to advance the legislation. "This bill is what happens when a major political party, in the grips of a personality cult, teams up with oil company CEOs, hedge fund donors, and climate deniers. All you need to do is look at who benefits from actively undercutting the clean energy industry that is creating tens of thousands of jobs across political geographies."
"The megabill isn't about reform—it's about rewarding the superrich and doling out fossil fuel industry handouts, all while dismantling the social safety nets on which millions depend for stability," Noël added. "It is a bet against the future."
Although Sen. Mike Lee's (R-Utah) provision to force the sale of public lands as well as a proposed excise tax on wind and solar projects were removed, other controversial policies survived, including required onshore and offshore fossil fuel lease sales, mandates for timber harvesting, the recision of various Inflation Reduction Act funding, an end to a moratorium on new coal leasing, and attacks on clean energy.
"Make no mistake, while the Senate did not include a punitive new excise tax on wind and solar projects, the bill is still devastating for the clean energy transition," warned Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) president Gretchen Goldman. "The bill would spike energy costs, threaten energy reliability, and strand hundreds of billions of dollars in clean energy and transportation investments along with the tens of thousands of domestic jobs that come with them. The provisions attacking clean energy and clean transportation are not about the budget, but rather Congress using the budget bill to boost fossil fuels by crushing these booming new industries."
Sierra Club executive director Ben Jealous declared that "today, Senate Republicans advanced the most anti-environment, anti-job, and anti-American bill in history."
"This shortsighted plan will put lives at risk, endanger our growing economy, and raise electricity rates on families and small businesses," he said. "The proposal expands drilling on public lands and in the Arctic, guts cost-cutting clean energy investments and the thousands of stable jobs they've created, and includes massive giveaways to corporate polluters and the very wealthiest Americans."
Jealous celebrated that public outrage led to the federal land sales and excise tax provisions getting axed, but added that "even with those important changes, a terrible bill is still a terrible bill, and this proposal fails the American people in every measure."
Margie Alt, director of the Climate Action Campaign, also highlighted how the legislation—if signed into law—will benefit rich individuals and corporations while causing working-class Americans to lose their jobs and pay higher energy bills.
"The Senate has turned its back on our clean energy future, raising our utility bills while mortgaging our health and environment to deliver massive tax breaks for billionaires," Alt said. She warned of job losses and increased climate pollution, meaning "kids will struggle with asthma and other respiratory problems. And, more people will suffer from devastating extreme weather catastrophes."
Manish Bapna, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, similarly said that "with spiking power demand and rising bills, we need more clean, affordable American energy, but Senate Republicans just voted to kill jobs and deliver the largest utility bill increase in U.S. history."
"Every senator who voted for this bill chose tax cuts for the wealthiest over the rest of our health, pocketbooks, public lands and waters, and a safe climate," Bapna argued. "This is like Robin Hood in reverse. The very rich will get richer and the rest of us will have to pay the price."
After 27 hours, Republicans passed their Big Ugly Bill—a catastrophic assault on health care, food, and climate.They chose Trump and billionaires over families and our future.This fight isn't over. Now it’s the House’s turn to stop it.We can't agonize—we must organize.
[image or embed]
— Senator Ed Markey (@markey.senate.gov) July 1, 2025 at 1:22 PM
The bill not only "will race us toward climate catastrophe" while giving tax breaks to the wealthy, said Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the watchdog Public Citizen, it also "steals assistance from vulnerable Americans, the bill would supercharge Trump's barbaric mass deportation policy, and throw an extra $150 billion at Pentagon contractors."
"Any member of Congress with a conscience knows that this bill must not become law," she added. "It's time for the House to stand up to President Trump and vote against it."
The GOP-controlled House had already passed a version of the megabill before every Senate Republican but Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Rand Paul (Ky.), and Thom Tillis (N.C.) advanced the latest edition on Tuesday. Now, the lower chamber's leaders plan to take up the new version in hopes of sending it to Trump's desk by his July 4 deadline.
"House members got it wrong the first time but have another chance now to do their jobs," said Goldman of UCS. "They must reject this bill, voting with their constituents in mind, not simply to avoid the ire of the president."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular