HUNGARY STANDS ITS GROUND ON MIGRATION DESPITE TAKING HEAT

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and German Chancellor Angela Merkel (not pictured) depart after speaking to the media prior to talks at the Chancellery on May 8, 2014 in Berlin, Germany / Getty

In a Politico article on Hungary’s supposedly hardening immigration line, the publication quotes a Human Rights Watch researcher by the name of Lydia Gall, claiming that:

“Blanket detention of asylum seekers goes against Hungary’s obligations under the Refugee Convention and EU law. Detention should always be a very last resort and there are clear cut criteria where detention may be used. It should always be decided on a case-by-case basis and never as a general measure.”

In her point of view, detention seems to be everything barring the way of migrants into Europe. On behalf of the Hungarian government, Orbán’s spokesman Zoltan Kovacs offers a counter-narrative.

Kovacs says that the new policies are directed at making sure that EU citizens are spared the burden of uncontrolled movement of migrants:

“we are going to introduce a new measure — no migrants, not even those who have achieved their request for asylum, can move freely until there is a final, legal decision whether they are entitled to political asylum or refugee status. They will not be entitled to move freely in the country.”

Previous reports have indicated the lack of oversight on migrants after they are allowed into the Schengen Zone.

On its website, the Hungarian government explains its position further:

“In other words, Hungary is not a front-line country. Once the said asylum seeker has reached Hungary, he or she has already traveled (sic) through other countries where the request for refugee status should have been made. (…) Because of the freedom of movement within the Schengen zone, migrants who have entered Hungary and requested asylum – more often than not coming from safe countries, entering illegally, and presenting fake papers – were then free to leave Hungary and travel on to other European countries before their case was closed.”

Kovacs also stated that:

“it’s not about detention, it’s about not giving the same opportunity for them as is being provided for European citizens. (…) We think in terms of shelters that are going to be provided according to EU and international standards, that are open the other way around. If someone decides that he or she is not going to wait weeks, maybe months, for a final decision… if someone decided they would like to go back it will be possible.”

Gall meanwhile sticks to her horses and is given the last word by Politico:

“the government should refrain from restricting freedom of movement of asylum seekers and provide open facilities where they can be accommodated in human and dignified conditions until decisions are made in their individual cases, as required by the refugee convention and EU law.”

In other words, Human Rights Watch doesn’t care about safety checks, or completely losing track of immigrants. Immigrants have rights. If you’re an EU citizen, your safety is being trumped by the horrors of an immigrant having to wait in Hungary for his story to be checked out.

The Hungarians have a different perception:

“the Ministry of Interior (sic) is working on a legal solution to close the gates of the refugee camps for those migrants whose case is still under consideration. It’s not an easy decision. We’ll take criticism for supposedly not defending the rights of asylum seekers, but the freedom of movement in Europe and the security of our citizens is a higher priority. (…) A better solution would be, as Hungary has proposed, for Europe to establish safe refugee camps outside the borders of the EU. Only those people who have been granted asylum would then be allowed to enter. Unfortunately, Europe has not yet endorsed this solution. So we’ll have to act on our own until then.”                                    

By Vincent van den Born