Dublin Agreement: Are Refugees Truly Safe in the First Country They Land In?
The Dublin Agreement, established in 1990, is a European Union (EU) law that determines which EU country is responsible for processing the asylum claim of a person seeking protection in the EU. According to the agreement, refugees are expected to claim asylum in the first safe country they enter. However, the question remains: Are refugees truly safe in the first country they land in?
The answer is complicated. While the Dublin Agreement assumes that all EU member states have equal and adequate asylum systems, the reality is that some countries are better equipped than others to provide protection to refugees. Greece, for example, has struggled to provide adequate housing, food, and medical care to the thousands of refugees who have landed on its shores. Similarly, Italy and Spain have been accused of providing substandard reception conditions for asylum-seekers.
The situation is further complicated by the fact that refugees do not always have a choice as to which country they enter first. Many refugees are forced to flee their home countries due to war, persecution, or violence, and they often have to take dangerous and unpredictable routes to reach safety. For example, refugees fleeing Syria may have no choice but to enter Turkey first, even though Turkey has been criticized for its treatment of refugees.
Moreover, the Dublin Agreement does not take into account the fact that different countries may have different strengths in providing particular kinds of protection. For example, Germany has a strong record of protecting refugees from political persecution, while Sweden is known for its strong protection of LGBTQ+ rights. Refugees who belong to minority groups may be better protected if they are able to travel to a country that has a record of protecting their specific rights.
Despite these challenges, the Dublin Agreement remains in force, with the aim of ensuring that EU member states share responsibility for protecting refugees. However, in practice, many EU countries have sought to evade their obligations under the agreement by closing their borders or by sending asylum-seekers back to the country where they first entered the EU.
The question remains: How can we ensure that refugees are truly safe when they enter the EU? One possible solution is for EU countries to work together to improve reception conditions and asylum systems across the EU. This would help to ensure that refugees receive equal and adequate protection, regardless of which EU country they enter first.
Another solution is for EU countries to provide more legal pathways for refugees to enter the EU. By providing visas or humanitarian visas, for example, refugees would not need to risk their lives by crossing dangerous borders or by relying on smugglers. Legal pathways would also allow EU countries to better control who enters their territory, while ensuring that those in need of protection receive it.
In conclusion, while the Dublin Agreement was established with the aim of ensuring that refugees are safe when they enter the EU, the reality is far more complex. Due to differences in reception conditions and asylum systems across the EU, refugees may not always be safe in the first country they enter. To ensure that refugees are truly safe, EU countries must work together to improve their protection systems and provide more legal pathways for refugees to enter the EU. Only then can we truly say that refugees are safe in the first country they enter.