Implementation of Safe Country Concepts

On 12 June 2026, the Pact on Migration and Asylum entered into application. As of this date, Section 5 of the APR is now directly applicable across EU Member States (with the exception of Denmark). Additionally, two key regulations were officially adopted in February 2026.

Regulation (EU) 2026/464 establishes a list of safe countries of origin at Union level which includes Bangladesh, Colombia, Egypt,  India, Kosovo According to the Council and the European Parliament, this designation is without prejudice to positions on status and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence. , Morocco and Tunisia. EU accession candidate countries are also designated as safe at the EU level, provided that the following three criteria are satisfied: there is no situation of international or internal armed conflict, no restrictive measures affecting fundamental rights and freedom, and the recognition rate for asylum claims by nationals of these countries is not higher than 20% across the EU. The European Commission is responsible for monitoring whether these exceptions apply or cease to apply and must inform Member States accordingly.

Regulation (EU) 2026/463 sets out rules on the application of the safe third country concept. The regulation removed the mandatory obligation to establish a connection between the applicant and the safe third country, and introduced two additional criteria to apply the concept, including transit through a safe third country or an agreement with a safe third country that includes safeguards ensuring that an applicant’s asylum application will be examined there. Furthermore, the automatic right to remain in the EU pending a decision on an appeal against an inadmissibility decision based on the safe third country concept was removed. 

On 12 June 2026, the European Commission published a notification in the Official Journal of the European Union (C/2026/3247) on the exemption of Ukraine as a safe country of origin. It justified the exemption due to continued armed conflict in Ukraine which was characterised by widespread and indiscriminate violence. 

On 5 February 2026, in NP v Predsedatel na Darzhavna agentsia za bezhantsite,[Aleb] (C-718/24), the CJEU interpreted the recast Asylum Procedures Directive (recast APD), which was the previous directive governing the application of the safe country concept prior to the entry into application of the APR. It ruled that:

• The ground for inadmissibility set out in Article 33(2)(c) of the recast APD which is based on the application of the safe third country concept does not necessarily have to be applied when examining the merits of an asylum application.
• An application examined on its merits may nevertheless be rejected as inadmissible on the ground that a third country is considered safe for the applicant, even if the applicant would otherwise meet the conditions for being granted international protection. By contrast, an application may be rejected as unfounded or manifestly unfounded only under the conditions set out in Article 32 of the recast APD and cannot be rejected as unfounded on the basis of the inadmissibility ground provided for in Article 33(2)(c) of the directive.
• Under Article 38(2)(a) of the recast APD, Member States must lay down in their national law the criteria for determining whether there is a connection between the applicant and the third country. That connection must be sufficient to make the applicant's transfer to that country reasonable.
• Article 38(2)(b) and (c) of the recast APD must be interpreted as meaning that the determining authority may apply the safe third country concept on the basis of information from publicly available sources and an executive decision establishing a national list of safe third countries, provided that national law lays down a methodology for determining, on a case-by-case basis, whether the relevant criteria are met, taking into account the individual circumstances of the applicant and allowing the applicant to challenge the existence of a connection within the meaning of Article 38(2)(a) of that Directive.
• In addition, the CJEU established that national courts have a specific duty to examine whether there is a connection between the applicant and the third country, even when the duty is not expressly provided for under domestic law.

Progress toward the full operationalisation of the Pact is still ongoing. During the reference period, the following countries updated their national legislation relating to the safe country concepts to align with the provisions enshrined in the APR: 

• Austria (Article 19 of the BFA-VG)
• Belgium (Articles 57/6/1 and 57/6/6 of the Law of 15 December 1980)
• Croatia (Articles 44 and 45 of the Law on International and Temporary Protection)
• Cyprus (Articles 118 and 119 of Refugee Law 2026)
• Czechia (Article 86(4) of the Asylum Act)
• Estonia (Section 5, Article 13 of the Act on Granting International Protection to Aliens)
• Finland (Article 100 of the Aliens Act)
• Germany (Articles 26, 26a, 27, 29, 29a, 29b of the Asylum Act)
• Greece (Article 132 of Law No 5307) 
• Ireland (Articles 11,12 and 13 of the International Protection Act 2026)
• Luxembourg (Article 28 of the Law of 11 June 2026 implementing the European Pact on Migration and Asylum)
• Netherlands (Article 32a of the Aliens Act 2000)
• Slovakia (Article 76 of 69/2026 Coll. on International Protection and on Amendments to Certain Acts); and 
• Sweden (Chapter 3c, Sections 6 and 7 of the Swedish Aliens Ordinance and Chapter 4, Section 6 of the Aliens Act)..

While many countries have adapted their national legislation in preparation for the Pact, the vast majority have not yet revised their national lists of safe countries of origin to remove the countries which have been designated as safe at the EU Level. 

The following developments were noted during the reference period:

• A revision of the list to remove the countries designated as safe at the EU level was noted in France, Ireland and Sweden.
• Sweden also added the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Uruguay to their national list. 
• Following the entry into application of the Pact on 12 June 2026, Belgium and Luxembourg apply their national lists only to applications lodged prior to this date, while Croatia stopped implementing its national list.
• The national list in Slovakia was repealed through legislation approved on 14 April 2026 and has since not been replaced by a new list. 
• in January 2026, Germany and Greece published an update to their national lists of safe countries of origin, reaffirming the same countries included in the previous list without any additions or removals. 
• On 26 June 2026, Ireland also re issued its list of safe third countries without any changes from the previous list. 

No other revisions to national lists of safe countries of origin and safe third countries have been observed in the reference period.