After almost ten years of debate, the EU adopted its new Pact on Migration and Asylum in spring 2024. The bundle of regulations and directives provides for procedures at the EU’s external borders for the first time: migrants without a chance of asylum can be prevented from travelling further and returned directly from border camps. Deportations to safe third countries are also possible. In addition, a new solidarity mechanism is in place that shares responsibility for receiving asylum seekers between EU external states and the other EU member states. However, member states can ‘buy out’ of this obligation by paying into an EU refugee fund or providing operational or technical support.

While some criticise the pact for enabling Europe to seal itself off and for not sufficiently guaranteeing the protection of human rights, others believe it does not go far enough to protect Europe from uncontrolled immigration and preserve achievements such as freedom of movement. What about the practical implementation of the pact? And are the measures in line with the right to asylum as recognised by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights?

At the end of the politically heated super election and campaign year 2024, high-profile experts took a look at the pact and its effects at a Human Rights Talk on 28 November 2024. The event took place at the invitation of the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Fundamental and Human Rights (LBI-GMR), the University of Vienna, the Austrian League of Human Rights and Amnesty International Austria and was attended by a large audience at the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna.

In her keynote speech, Anuscheh Farahat, Professor of Public Law at the University of Vienna, criticised, among other things, the EU’s attempt to evade its responsibility by means of a legal fiction. In her keynote speech, Anuscheh Farahat, Professor of Public Law at the University of Vienna, criticised, among other things, the EU’s attempt to evade its responsibility by means of a legal fiction. ‘We pretend that the person is not here,’ said the professor about the screening procedures at the external borders. Returns and strict immigration laws are currently in vogue internationally, she said, referring to Donald Trump in the USA, for instance. Farahat argued in favour of switching from a defensive mode to a positive one and focusing on opportunities in order to rethink migration and integration policy. ‘We need a vision of how to deal with migration as a society in the long term,’ said the legal expert.

Adel-Naim Reyhani, Senior Researcher at the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Fundamental and Human Rights, took a similarly critical view of the new Asylum and Migration pact. According to the researcher, it is a response to the perceived loss of control and the mood in society, not to the actual reality we are dealing with. ‘The population expects solutions to something that cannot be solved,’ he said, addressing reasons for flight such as economic inequality, fundamentalism and terrorism.

According to Kathrin Stainer-Hämmerle, Professor of Political Science at the Carinthia University of Applied Sciences, there is a danger in the fact that the distinction between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ immigration is being reinforced. ‘It’s all about fear, envy and not enough about solutions,’ the political scientist continues. Many societal problems, such as in the area of education or violence against women, are linked to immigration by various political actors.

Lukas Gahleitner-Gertz, Spokesperson and Expert on Asylum Law at Asylkoordination Österreich, considers the Asylum and Migration pact to be a ‘historic moment’ insofar as it is a sign of the ability to act. However, according to Gahleitner-Gertz, this was at the expense of the content. In Austria, the expert sees a decoupling of the discourse from reality in view of the current historic low in the number of asylum seekers.

‘Solidarity between the member states was one of the reasons why it took so long,’ explained Lukas Mandl, Member of the European Parliament for the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats), on the long road to the pact. He pointed out that although the problems could not be solved immediately, the EU had much greater leverage than Austria alone. With regard to the latest election results in this country, he was ‘concerned’ by the result of the National Council elections and ‘shocked by the Styrian election result’. However, he did not concede that the FPÖ was driving him on, said the MP later in the discussion. In response to fears of a reduction in fundamental rights, he replied that no other part of the world defends human rights, fundamental rights and civil liberties as much as the EU.

The welcoming words from the organisers were delivered by Angelika Watzl, Secretary General of the Austrian League for Human Rights. The evening was moderated by Anna-Maria Wallner, Head of the Debate Department and podcast producer at the daily newspaper ‘Die Presse’. The event concluded with an audience Q&A and a get-together hosted by the organisers.

The Human Rights Talks see themselves as a platform for social discourse on current topics with human rights relevance. The events present top-class speakers to the interested public and analyse human rights challenges and socio-political trends in a differentiated manner and with professional expertise, but at the same time in an accessible way and with practical relevance. An important component of the format is the interactive audience discussion in addition to contentual contributions