4.1. Making asylum systems more resilient

Table of contents

4.1. Making asylum systems more resilient

 

Section 2.1. Reforming the Common European Asylum System: An ongoing process

In 2025, asylum authorities focused on strengthening their capacity for the implementation of the Pact. Following the EUAA template provided in 2024, almost all Member States adopted national contingency plans which outlined different scenarios, indicators and thresholds for activating or de-activating response measures.144 Activities centred around three major areas: reducing the number of pending cases awaiting a decision, allocating capacity to arrange for the practical implementation of the new rules, and training staff on the new provisions.

In addition to the financial support made available through the European Commission (such as the TSI) and technical support through the EUAA to carry out activities with these objectives, EU+ countries collaborated bilaterally as well. For example, Switzerland financed and shared knowledge on strengthening migration management (especially the protection system for children and applicants with special needs) in Bulgaria145 and strengthening reception and protection for unaccompanied children in Italy.146 The Bulgarian State Agency for Refugees (SAR) and the Norwegian Directorate of Immigration (UDI) cooperated on improving communication with applicants through interpreters.147 The Cypriot Asylum Service went on a study visit to the Swiss SEM on the production of country of origin information (COI), while the Latvian Office of Citizenship and Migration Affairs (OCMA) learnt about digital solutions in Lithuania during a working visit.148


 

Table 1. Revisions to legislation related to the activation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum, as of 30 April 2026

Country Legislative changes
Austria A draft law was shared for public consultation between 15 January-12 February 2026.149 The Council of Ministers adopted the draft legislation concerning amendments arising from the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum on 24 March 2026.150 The legislation is now to be discussed in Parliament.151
Belgium The draft law reforming the rules of procedure for the Council for Alien Law Litigation (CALL) was published on 10 March 2026.152 Other parts are under discussion, no draft law published yet.
Bulgaria Proposal for a new law on international protection, giving more independence to the asylum authority. Proposal published for consultation on 23 January 2026.153
Croatia Public consultation on amendments to the Law on Foreigners and the International and Temporary Protection Act closed on 13 December 2025.154
Cyprus A new Refugee Law was put forth for consultation in July 2025155 and the final draft bill was sent for review to the Legal Service of the Republic in January 2026. The bill amending the Cyprus Refugee Law (incorporating the provisions of the Pact) was adopted on 23 April 2026.156
Czechia An amendment to the Act on Asylum was approved and will enter into force on 12 June 2026.157
Denmark Denmark is not bound by most instruments of the Pact on Migration and Asylum.
Estonia The Draft Act on Granting International Protection to Aliens was submitted for public consultation from 26 June 2025–1 September 2025.158
Finland Under discussion, no draft law published yet.
France Under discussion, no draft law published yet.
Germany The federal government adopted two laws for the transposition of the Pact.159 Both laws were adopted by the German Bundestag and approved by the Bundesrat in February and March 2026.
Greece Under discussion, no draft law published yet.
Hungary Reiterated its stance not to implement the Pact.160
Iceland Iceland is not bound by the Pact on Migration and Asylum. Legislative proposals on the transposition of the Qualifications Regulation and the Screening Regulation were discussed in Parliament.161
Ireland The Cabinet approved the General Scheme of the International Protection Bill 2025, intended to replace the International Protection Act 2015.162
Italy Under discussion, no draft law published yet. Screening was piloted in Lampedusa.163
Latvia Under discussion, no draft law published yet.
Lithuania Amendments to the Law on the Legal Status of Foreigners were submitted to the government, no draft law published yet.164
Luxembourg The Council of Government approved a draft bill to operationalise provisions of the Pact in national law in January 2026.165 The draft for transposing the RDC 2024 has not yet been presented.
Malta Under discussion, no draft law published yet.
Netherlands The draft law underwent consultation between 20 December 2024-17 February 2025.166
Norway Norway is not bound by all of the instruments of the Pact on Migration and Asylum but will implement parts related to the Schengen system and the Dublin procedure, including the AMMR (Parts 3, 5 and 7), the Screening Regulation, the recast Eurodac Regulation, and the Crisis and Force Majeure Regulation (Articles 12 and 13, and Articles 1-6 when they are relevant for the application of Articles 12 and 13). The draft law for the implementation was presented on 27 March 2026.167
Poland Under discussion, no draft law published yet.
Portugal Under discussion, no draft law published yet.
Romania The draft law for the operationalisation of the Pact instruments was published on 4 February 2026.168
Slovakia The new law on international protection was under an inter-ministerial consultation process in 2025. The draft was published on 7 January 2026.169
Slovenia The new legislation was prepared. No draft law published yet.
Spain Under discussion, no draft law published yet.
Sweden Under discussion, no draft law published yet.
Switzerland Switzerland is not bound by most instruments of the Pact on Migration and Asylum. Public consultations took place on the amendment of the Asylum Act and related ordinances.170

The CJEU ruled that the time limit for making a decision may be extended only when the number of applications increases significantly within a short period of time, but significant backlogs or staff shortages do not justify an extension when applications increase gradually over an extended period.171

Capacity-building activities were based on the individual situation in asylum and reception in each country. Some countries continued to focus on organisational changes and staff recruitment. For example in Croatia, a new sector for international protection was established with three departments and additional staff.172 The Maltese International Protection Agency established a Workflow Unit which operates horizontally across the organisation to coordinate logistics, interpretation, scheduling and cross-unit workflow arrangements. The agency also hired several new staff members (both as protection officers and administrative support). The Cypriot Asylum Service aimed to obtain more permanent staff and establish 32 permanent positions (independent from EU funding) by 2026. In Portugal, the Agency for Integration, Migration and Asylum (AIMA) hired new staff and indicated the need to continue with this process to meet its capacity needs. Discussions continued in Belgium on the creation of a Federal Public Service on Asylum and Migration and a working group was established with representatives of different asylum services (Office of the Commissioner General for Refugees and Stateless Persons (CGRS), Federal Agency for the Reception of Asylum Seekers (Fedasil) and Immigration Office).

Capacity-building continued through enhanced training initiatives as well. The Swedish Migration Agency (SMA) launched a project (K.R.A.F.T.) to strengthen opportunities for skills development for its staff and, hence, the agency’s overall adaptability and resilience. Staff members of the Romanian General Inspectorate for Immigration (GII) were offered extensive training opportunities as well. Decision-makers at the Portuguese AIMA underwent training specifically to strengthen their capacity in collecting, analysing and using COI.

Nonetheless, capacities remained divided, as some staff were involved in tasks around the implementation of the Pact, ranging from support to the drafting of new laws to technical discussions on the practical implementation and logistical arrangements.

Several asylum authorities continued to revise or fine-tune internal procedures and update templates and decision drafts with the objective to increase the efficiency of their decision-making processes, for example in Bulgaria, Cyprus and Portugal. In Finland, in order to save interview time and expedite the process, the applicant and the representative are given 2 weeks to provide comments on the interview record when it is not reviewed in full on the spot.173 In Spain, the increased use of decision templates for certain nationalities contributed to more efficient decision-making and a reduction in pending cases.174 However, CEAR expressed concerns about the quality of these decisions, finding that they were not always sufficiently individualised.175

Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands continued with projects to decrease the number of pending cases. Following the Tabula Rasa project in 2024 which was piloted within two units, in the second phase called Prisma, the Belgian CGRS created 12 additional units with 12-15 volunteers in each unit. The evaluation of the Tabula Rasa project showed that the efficiency of teams organised in a more flexible manner increased by 10-20%, while maintaining the quality of decision-making and slightly increasing the staff’s self-reported well-being.176 The evaluation of Prisma was ongoing.

The European Commission highlighted the importance of cooperating with judicial bodies and strengthening them in the framework of the implementation process.177 As part of the asylum law reform in Ireland, the Cabinet approved the establishment of a new second instance body to manage asylum appeals based on the Pact.178 The Tribunal for Asylum and Returns Appeals (TARA) becomes operational on 12 June 2026. The International Protection Appeals Tribunal (IPAT) will continue to exist and hear asylum appeals related to applications lodged before the entry into application of the Pact. Continuing efforts to bring the judge closer to the asylum seeker,179 the French National Court of Asylum (CNDA) opened two new territorial chambers in Nantes and Marseille.180 To adapt more quickly to the changing workload, the Maltese government amended rules on the constitution of the Immigration Appeals Board and the assignment of cases among its divisions.181 Similarly in Iceland, amendments on the composition of the Immigration Appeals Board entered into force to improve efficiency.182 In Czechia, as part of the TSI project, the Department for Asylum and Migration Policy cooperated with administrative courts on providing COI for the assessment of claims. The CJEU clarified that courts must be able to order an applicant’s medical examination when the court considers that this is necessary or relevant for the assessment of an asylum application.183