BRUSSELS (Pakistan Point News / Sputnik - 07th December, 2018) The UN Global Compact for Migration remains at the center of controversy in Europe days before it is to be finally approved at the Marrakesh summit, with the Belgian coalition government joining the list of EU nations that have been split over the need to sign the agreement.
The global compact is expected to be formally endorsed at an intergovernmental conference in the Moroccan city of Marrakesh on December 10-11. The text of the non-binding pact, which seeks to cover all dimensions of international migration, was finalized back in July by all UN member states with only the United States staying out.
The motion has proved to be a divisive issue in Europe, with Austria, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and Lithuania abandoning their plans to sign the agreement over concerns that the pact might put certain restrictions on their national migration policies.
Earlier in the week, the largest party of the Belgian ruling coalition, the New Flemish Alliance (N-VA), categorically rejected the UN migration pact. Instead of filing a resignation, Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel, who belongs to Mouvement Reformateur (MR) party, turned to parliament for an approval of the pact, by asking the left opposition to support the text.
Technically, the decisions made by Belgian prime minister must reflect unanimity in his/her government. This consensus rule was introduced in the constitution to protect the French-speaking minority from a possible dominance by the Flemish majority in the country.
Michel, however, keeps saying "I will go to Marrakesh," and has been already supported by three parties of his coalition � namely, Flemish Christian Democrats (CD&V), Open Flemish Liberals and Democrats (VLD) and the MR party.
"I will go to Marrakesch. I suppose everyone respects parliament, including members of the majority. I am aware of the campaign of a political party [the N-VA party] on migration, for me it is unacceptable. I decided to let the parliament make a decision on this. This is the house of democracy," Michel said, citing the N-VA party's online campaign against the UN migration pact.
Meanwhile, constitutionalists clearly note that the issue of signing an international treaty must be decided by the entire government, which works "collegially and with consensus".
"The government holds ministerial councils, in which each minister can theoretically stop a decision or procedure. And if that is the case, no one, even Prime Minister Michel, can ratify the treaty and go to Marrakesh, even if he has found a 'replacement' majority in parliament. As long as the N-VA stays in the government, he is blocked. The question is will the N-VA leave or remain and cancel the signature of the treaty?" Stefan Sottiaux, a professor of Law at Catholic University of Leuven, told Sputnik.
The N-VA, however, maintains that it would neither back the compact nor leave the coalition government.
Meanwhile, the population, according to the polls, seems to be similarly against any decisions that would favor undocumented immigration.
THE CLOSER SUMMIT, THE LONGER LIST OF 'DESERTERS'
According to Aldo Carcaci, a Belgian parliament member from the People's Party (PP), the current crisis within the Belgian cabinet is demonstrating a wider split within the European Union over the issue.
"The Belgian conventional press tries to hide the fact that many countries and not the smallest, including in Europe, refuse this migration pact, that would tie the hands of nations in stopping illegal immigration. The negotiations on the 'United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration' were initiated with the encouragements of Barack Obama when he was in the White House. The closer the summit in Marrakesh gets, the longer the list of 'deserters' becomes," Carcaci told Sputnik.
He noted that, even French and German governments, who publicly support the pact, are actually "carefully hid[ing] the fact that there is strong opposition, in their parliaments and within the ruling parties themselves."
"In Germany, as Donald Trump has said, Mrs Merkel's policy on migration ruined her superstar status. She is on the way out. In her party, several Lander [federal states'] CDU sections refused the pact but she managed to impose it, like our center-left prime minister tries to do here in Belgium. It is a disgrace for democracy and the press in Europe is spreading fake news by 'forgetting' to mention the countries that have already said no," Carcaci pointed out.
'PACT WOULD ONLY ATTRACT MORE MIGRANTS'
Italy, in turn, said that it would not take part in the conference in Morocco, with Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte not ruling out that Rome would have to finally sign the controversial pact, if the parliament decided to do so.
Mario Borghezio, a member of the European parliament from Italy's Lega party, summed up the Italian cabinet's concerns over the deal in his comment to Sputnik.
"This pact would only attract more migrants. By refusing to sign the UN pact on migration, [Italian Deputy Prime Minister] Matteo Salvini is simply being consistent; this text will make it more difficult to manage the migration phenomenon. It gives more rights to illegal migrants and increases the cost for host countries ... The deportation of minors would be forbidden for example," Borghezio said.
He added that the Italian government is "naturally aligning itself" with other political forces across the globe that have already rejected the pact.
"The Marrakesh pact is by no means a global agreement. It is a source of new conflict within the EU," he concluded.
Meanwhile, several countries, such as the Netherlands and Denmark, have tried to alleviate the heavy critics by issuing "explanatory notes" to make the pact more palatable to their population.
In the Netherlands, Prime Minister Mark Rutte said at first that the government was still analyzing the legal aspects of the pact, but in the end, the majority voted to sign the compact in New York on December 19, after the Marrakesh meeting on December 10-11.
As for the position of the Dutch opposition on the right of the political spectrum, the leader of the Party for Freedom group in the Senate, Marjolein Faber, told Sputnik that the decision was an "equivalent of a collective suicide."
"We will get much more immigration after this. We open the doors wide to immigration from Africa and abandon our sovereignty," she claimed.
Reacting to the situation around the pact, the United Nations stated that "moves to shun the accord are regrettable and mistaken."
"The compact is simply aimed at improving the management of cross-border movements of people. It was never the intention of the signatories to have interpretations of the United Nations text. We simply expect countries to sign it," UN Special Representative for International Migration Louise Arbour said.
OPPOSITION TO THE PACT IN GERMANY
Last week, 372 German lawmakers voted to support the migration compact, with 153 against and 141 abstentions.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel thereby managed to secure the necessary support for the pact, though there was heavy internal opposition.
Friedrich Merz, the leader of the CDU/CSU Group in the Bundestag and one of the strong candidates to succeed the chancellor at the helm of the party, has been against the pact, for instance. The Free Democratic Party similarly opposes it.
Several constitutional lawyers such as Frank Schorkopf and Reinhard Merkel have sharply criticized the migration compact and warned of the political consequences. The Federal government has been accused by these lawyers of "misdirection" and wrong perception of the real content of the pact.
The right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party similarly believes that the compact imposes "many costly political commitments" and "ties the hands of governments" in shaping a national migration policy.
"This Migration Pact is harmful for Europe. It contains many costly political commitments, ties the hands of governments and will lead to even more immigration to Germany. The AfD does not spread 'Fake News.' On the contrary, it is the government of Mrs Merkel that is not truthful when they assure the population that the migration pact is completely non-binding and in the interest of Germany!" Alexander Gauland, one of the AfD chairs, told Sputnik.
According to Gauland, the compact "takes away German sovereignty," therefore the country "should follow the path shown by the US, Israel, Austria and many other states and reject the migration pact. "
He noted that the text of the compact "constantly emphasizes the 'human rights' of migrants," leaving the rights of the country's citizens behind.
"Those living in Duisburg or Berlin-Neukölln also have rights, and crime there increases when there is less affordable housing, because the communities need the available social houses for so-called 'refugees,' or when there are hardly any children in Primary schools who speak German as their mother tongue, bringing down the level of teaching. That's also important," he stressed.
The situation around the migration pact, thus, shows that it is unlikely to become a fundamental text for the United Nations, since so many important countries have refused to sign it. And the list is not closed yet.
