Page 53 - AEI Insights 2018 Vol 4 Issue 1

Szanto, 2018

owing to wellfounded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion,
nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside
the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to
avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and
being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events,
is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it

Hungary and other EU member-states are signatory parties of this convention. According to
the convention such a person is entitled to certain protections from members of the international
community, most importantly safe shelter and assistance from receiving states. Hungary has
an asylum process adhering to the relevant UN protocol. (Bevándorlási és Menekültügyi
Hivatal/a) Assistance is provided to anyone who is:
… a person whose life and liberty are threatened in his/her country of origin on
account of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or
political opinion, or whose fear of being subject to persecution is well founded, and
who currently resides in the territory of Hungary and submits an application for
asylum.

The only requirements are that (a) the person contacts the relevant government agency
immediately upon arrival and (b) submits him/herself to the relevant procedures (identification
process and a maximum of 6 months of detention depending on court order).

The European Union has its own common process to handle refugees called the Dublin
regulation. (EUR-Lex, 1990) At the core of the protocol are two key components: (a) asylum
seekers are processed in their country of arrival and (b) asylum seekers are resettled throughout
the EU based on a quota system. A clear goal of the convention is to share the burden facing
Europe: asylum seekers are distributed within the EU based on the means of the host country.
Importantly Brussels does not simply leave the Schengen border countries to fend for
themselves as the convention ensures that each member-state has to contribute to the solution
of the crisis.

The problem is derived from the fact that not everyone seeking entry into Europe is a refugee.
Looking back at the two National Consultation questionnaires, one can see that the Government
references migrants, predominantly illegal migrants, rather than refugees or asylum seekers. It
is the Government’s contention that a large portion of people arriving to Europe are not
legitimate asylum seekers but rather economic migrants not entitled to the aforementioned
protections exploiting the refugee crisis for personal gain. Hungary refuses to accommodate
the resettlement of such people under the Dublin process. The problem is further compounded
by the fact that a large number of refugees and economic migrants have exploited lax border
security to slip into the European Union illegally and are already within the borders of the
Schengen area.

At the core of the Government’s arguments is a fundamental misrepresentation of both the UN
and EU asylum process. Anyone can seek asylum and under international law their application
has to be processed. This means that Hungary and the EU has to process people whether they
are refugees or economic migrants. However, neither the relevant UN conventions nor the
Dublin process extends protections to economic migrants. If a person is found to have tried to
exploit the asylum process in order to bypass immigration, then asylum status is not granted
and the person is deported. The European Union does not require Hungary to settle economic
migrants, only refugees, which is an obligation of Hungary independently from the European

53