Skip to content
REPORT (2019/2206(INI))

On the implementation of the Dublin III Regulation

A-9-2020-0245

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs · Rapporteur: Fabienne Keller

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX
✦ In shortFull textProcedure & committee votes
✦ In short · AI summary of this text, generated 25 Sept 2026

Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.

The report assesses how the Dublin III Regulation has been implemented and finds it has failed to determine quickly which Member State is responsible for an asylum application or to share responsibility fairly. It describes structural problems: skewed use of the first-country-of-entry criterion, rare use of family and discretionary clauses, missed deadlines, few transfers carried out, and secondary movements. It calls for a solidarity mechanism for fair allocation of responsibility, more resources for frontline Member States and EASO, and a swift reform of the Common European Asylum System. It asks for better protection of fundamental rights, children and vulnerable people, clearer rules on detention and family reunification, and simpler, faster procedures with legal assistance and information. It urges the Commission to publish its overdue assessment report and the Council to adopt qualified majority voting when reforming the regulation.

Committee position. The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs proposes that Parliament find the Dublin III Regulation ineffective, call for a solidarity-based mechanism and a swift reform of the Common European Asylum System, and demand better protection of fundamental rights and simpler procedures.

Key points

  1. Parliament finds the Dublin III Regulation imposes a disproportionate burden on a minority of Member States, especially frontline countries, and has failed to determine responsibility swiftly or distribute it fairly.
  2. It stresses that hotspots, the 2015 temporary relocation programme and EU agencies such as EASO and Frontex were meant to ease the flaws, and calls for more resources for frontline Member States while Dublin is unreformed.
  3. It calls for a sustainable solidarity mechanism allocating responsibility fairly under Article 80 TFEU, with civil society participation, and for better use of the Article 17 discretionary clause.
  4. It welcomes the 2015 and 2016 relocation decisions but deplores unfulfilled Member State commitments, and says ad hoc relocation agreements are no substitute for a harmonised asylum system.
  5. It deplores the Council's failure to adopt a position on the Dublin IV recast, calls for a swift reform of the Common European Asylum System, and asks the Council to use qualified majority voting.
  6. It notes that the Article 33 early warning mechanism and the Temporary Protection Directive have never been invoked, and that preventive action plans may be drawn up for Member States under pressure.
  7. It calls for EASO to be given a stronger role, including a European Asylum Agency with sufficient resources, monthly operational dialogue and a platform for exchanging information and best practices.
  8. It says fundamental rights must be central, including protection of children, trafficking victims and LGBTI persons, and that transfers must not expose anyone to refoulement.
  9. It calls on Member States to use detention only as a last resort, for as short a time as possible, never in the best interests of the child, and to clarify what a 'significant risk of absconding' means.
  10. It calls for effective implementation of family unity, dependent persons and discretionary clauses, harmonised standards of proof for family reunification, and better age assessment and guardianship for unaccompanied minors.
  11. It deplores that transfers were carried out in only 11% of cases, calls for simpler procedures, harmonised time limits, and revision of transfer-of-responsibility rules, including penalties for Member States refusing transfers.
  12. It calls for legal assistance and clear information for applicants, better data sharing through Eurodac, and asks the Commission to publish its overdue Article 46 assessment report.

Who is affected

  • Frontline Member States such as Greece, Italy, Malta, Cyprus and Spain, which bear disproportionate registration and reception burdens.
  • Asylum seekers, who face long procedures, detention, secondary movements and violations of fundamental rights.
  • Children and unaccompanied minors, who need tailored information, guardianship and age assessment.
  • Women and girls, who need gender-sensitive treatment, psychological help and protection from violence.
  • National asylum authorities and Dublin units, which are understaffed and face rising workloads.

Figures and deadlines

  • 2.5 million people applied for asylum in the EU in 2015-16, compared to 562 000 in 2014 and 278 000 in 2012.
  • Early 2020, 855 000 asylum applications were still pending.
  • Between 2008 and 2017, one-third of Member States hosted 90% of asylum seekers.
  • In 2018, Germany recorded 184 180 applications (28%), France 120 425 (19%), Greece 66 695 (11%), Italy 59 950 (10%) and Spain 52 700 (9%).
  • Early 2020, Greek hotspots housed 42 000 migrants against a planned capacity of 6 000.
  • Of 160 000 asylum seekers to be relocated from Greece and Italy, Member States committed to 98 256 and relocated 34 705.
  • Only 11% of transfers are actually carried out; between 2016 and 2019, 54.6% in Greece, 42.2% in Sweden, 11.2% in Germany, 6.7% in France and 1.6% in Italy.
  • The sovereignty clause was invoked just under 2 000 times in 2018 against more than 155 000 asylum applications.

Legal basis: Article 78(2)(e) and Article 80 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.