Parliament approved Commission proposals for a computerised system for the recognition of fingerprints of applicants for asylum - "EURODAC". The draft convention was approved with a number of amendments from the civil liberties committee designed to ensure proper respect for human rights, and involvement of the European Parliament in the operation of the system. MEPs want the system to be strictly controlled and not used for other purposes.
On behalf of the civil liberties committee, Hedy d'Ancona (Nl, PES) gave a general welcome to Commission proposals for EURODAC. She argued that achieving a harmonisation of member states' policies was an essential condition for setting up the EURODAC system.
In the light of the debate on Kurdish refugees in Italy, the EURODAC system should not be seen simply as a means of excluding many migrants from the EU. She called for the Commission to be given a bigger role in the systems, including responsibility for the co-ordination of data exchange and for operating a central database of fingerprints.
Wilmya Zimmermann (D, PES) argued that the effects of the proposals were very significant for individuals, many of whom had fled from persecution. He was concerned about a fortress Europe being built and argued for a common asylum and immigration policy across the EU.
Abuses
Hartmut Nassauer (D, EPP) also supported the proposal, arguing that it was absurd to say it criminalised asylum seekers. When the applications of asylum seekers had been accepted, he stressed, their fingerprints should be erased from the system. Mr Nassauer noted, however, that there was evidence of abuse of asylum by people who were making multiple social security applications.
In Germany, he stated, it was found that only 5 per cent of the current 104,000 asylum seekers were being politically persecuted. There were 46,000 cases of abuse of the German system.
Abdelkader Mohamed Ali (E, EUL/NGL) argued that a European database could be a dangerous element which would threaten the well-being of asylum seekers. He called for the best possible legal safety net and noted with concern that the French authorities had turned down applicants for asylum from Algeria. Only when there was political union, he said, could the EU really talk about refugees from third countries.
His fears were echoed by Johannes Voggenhuber (A, Greens) who recalled the centenary of Emile Zola's polemic J'accuse. This tract, he said, symbolised opposition to power that tolerated injustice.
He had thought that this type of power had been tamed, but he feared that xenophobia was now rising and that the Kurdish asylum seekers were seen simply as illegal immigrants. At this stage, he concluded, "we in the EU are the accused".
Replying for the Commission, Anita Gradin welcomed Mrs d'Ancona's proposals. She argued that the EURODAC convention could only be discussed in the light of the Dublin Convention. This sets out the criteria determining the country responsible for examining an application for asylum.
EURODAC, she said, made it possible to discover whether applications for asylum were made in several places by the same person. She stressed that the EURODAC was needed as soon as possible and the Commission could not wait until the Amsterdam Treaty came into force. She believed that the EURODAC Convention was compatible with the rules on data protection, and she was happy to accept that, after a five year period, the Council of Ministers would consider whether it was still necessary to store data on those who had been granted refugee status.