Socialists and Democrats in the committee on civil liberties, justice and home affairs (LIBE) in the European Parliament will today vote against two highly controversial migration reforms proposed by the European Commission.

The files – Safe Country of Origin and the Safe Third Country Concept – aim to drastically undermine key elements of the Migration and Asylum Pact, which the S&Ds helped to deliver under the last mandate. 

Despite persistent engagement with the rapporteurs, the S&Ds maintain strong concerns that the legislation is rushed, will allow member states to unilaterally disapply the right to asylum, and will create a situation where Europe is strategically dependent on foreign governments to manage migration.

S&Ds will therefore vote against the Safe Country of Origin report and will vote to reject the Safe Third Country Concept completely.

Ana Catarina Mendes, S&D vice-president, said:

“These proposals would open the door for member states to unilaterally disapply the right to asylum, creating a system that trades human beings for money. This approach does not respect fundamental rights and, ultimately, it will not work. As a Union, we can do better than the failed Rwanda and Albania models. It is an unacceptable move.

“The Pact was delivered thanks to the socialist vote, but what is happening now is the Commission is going far beyond the Pact, even before its entry into force. The European Union must uphold its values, or they will perish. Democracy starts and ends with people.” 

Cecilia Strada, S&D shadow rapporteur, said:

“Given that these proposals seek to fundamentally alter the EU’s asylum rules, they warranted a serious and decent parliamentary process. Instead, the pressure to move forward with these files has been high, despite the fact that asylum applications are at some of their lowest levels in years. Irregular crossings have fallen 22% in the first 10 months of 2025, according to Frontex.

“The Commission has presented no impact assessments despite the huge implications on fundamental rights. Rather than a serious process, I fear the EPP and ECR rapporteurs are more focused on delivering Giorgia Meloni’s Christmas present: slashed EU asylum rules.

“This will expose this Parliament to hypocrisy, considering that several countries on the EU list of safe countries of origin have recently been the subject of resolutions condemning the deterioration of rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights, such as Georgia, Serbia, Turkey and Tunisia, voted by a large majority including the EPP. Now we are being asked to say they are safe. This is deeply cynical and inconsistent. And worse than that, it will create strategic dependence on these governments as they ask for more and more concessions in exchange for accepting asylum seekers. We cannot support proposals that seek to establish a trade in migrants for money with third countries. It is wrong and unsustainable.”

Note to editors

Irregular entries into the European Union dropped by 22% in the first ten months of 2025 to 152 000(opens in a new tab) [1], according to preliminary data released last month by Frontex, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency.

S&Ds have strong concerns about both files - Safe Country of Origin and the Safe Third Country Concept - being presented at the LIBE committee. 

Rules for creating an EU list of Safe Countries of Origin already exist under the Asylum Procedure Regulation, a key element of the Migration and Asylum Pact. The new Commission proposal aims to significantly weaken the existing rules in two key ways. 

Firstly, under this proposal, all candidate countries for EU accession would de facto be considered safe for their own nationals without assessment of whether they actually fulfil the criteria laid down under the Pact rules. Even where the Parliament has adopted resolutions on candidate countries, pointing to civil unrest, foreign interference, or political extremism, MEPs in the LIBE committee are being asked to ignore these positions. Secondly, additional countries identified as ‘safe’ under the proposal – such as Egypt, Tunisia and Bangladesh - should not be considered safe. Even ‘factsheets’ produced by the European Union Asylum Agency – which are supposed to support the Commission proposal – do not support the assessment that these countries are safe.

The Safe Third Country Concept – essentially another country outside the EU in which an asylum seeker might get protection instead of within the EU – is also regulated by the Pact. Again, the Commission proposal seeks to fundamentally re-writes these rules. 

Among other changes, the proposal removes the ‘connection criterion’ which currently stipulates that a third country can only be considered safe for an asylum seeker if they have a familial, cultural or linguistic connection, or have resided or studied in the country. If this criterion is removed, member state governments will be free – through loose bilateral arrangements – to designate any third country as safe for any and all asylum seekers. In this circumstance, a member state will therefore be free to reject any asylum applications it receives on the basis that safety could be found in this third country, irrespective of the merits of individual asylum applications. Given that the proposal would allow a member state to unilaterally end the right to asylum, the S&D Group has tabled an amendment to reject this proposal.