According to the report, the EU Asylum and Migration Pact has been in the works since 2015 and will enter into force in two years.
It aims to expedite the asylum process and increase the return of irregular migrants to their home countries.
It will also call on EU member states to share responsibility for asylum seekers.
Meanwhile, last year saw 380,000 migrants unlawfully cross the EU’s borders, the biggest amount since 2016.
The EU stated that the treaty blended “mandatory solidarity” among member states with flexibility. Although some EU member states continue to resist portions of the accord, it is expected to be approved in its entirety by the end of April via majority vote.
Under the new guidelines, the EU’s 27 countries must either accept thousands of migrants from ‘frontline’ countries like Italy, Greece, and Spain, or offer additional funds or resources.
The treaty also states that asylum petitions with “low chances of being accepted” should be processed quickly, without necessarily admitting the applicant to EU territory.
The agreement also aims to deal with asylum requests within a maximum of 12 weeks. In case of rejection, asylum seekers would have to be returned forcibly to their home country within the same period.
Migrants will be subject to a toughened pre-entry screening procedure within seven days, which would include identification and health and security checks.
Biometric data for any migrant aged six or older will be collected and there will be a mechanism to respond to sudden increases in arrivals.
Meanwhile, the migration pact has been backed by two main political groups – the centre-right European People’s Party Group (EPP Group) and the centre-left Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D).
Both groups are trying to fend off a strong challenge from the right in parliamentary elections in June.
Many NGOs also pushed MEPs to vote against the legislation, with Amnesty International saying that the agreement will result in a “surge in suffering” for asylum seekers.
One typical complaint raised by NGOs is that asylum seekers with a low probability of being accepted would have their claims handled on small border islands or in prison centers in frontline states, resulting in less access to fair procedures.
The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) expressed concern about “the normalization of detention and speedier processes at borders.” It warned that quick decisions could result in the deportation of those who should have been awarded protection.
