CIVICUS discusses Poland’s new migration control strategy with Marcin Sosniak, coordinator of the Migration Unit at the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights (HFHR), a civil society organisation working to protect human rights in Poland and Eurasia.

As far-right parties gain ground across Europe, so do anti-migrant policies. Although the number of migrants entering the European Union (EU) is falling, the European Commission is responding to political pressure by preparing new legislation to make deportations easier and allow states to close their borders if they claim security reasons. Poland’s new migration strategy includes restrictions on the right to apply for asylum for migrants from Belarus and Russia, with the government claiming Russia promotes migration to destabilise western government.

What’s Poland’s new migration strategy and why was it introduced?

Poland’s new migration strategy, ‘Regain control. Ensure Security‘, is more political posturing than a real plan. Although it was presented as a comprehensive document, it uses vague language and lacks tangible proposals. It often confuses key concepts such as national and international protection and doesn’t rely on reliable data on migration in Poland or the effectiveness of migration policies. It adopts an anti-migrant position on the basis of a supposed consensus about the situation on the Poland-Belarus border.

Tensions on the border rose in 2021, as the number of people attempting to cross increased. Many of them were refugees from Afghanistan, Eritrea, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. Since then, the government has introduced several regulations that allow for pushbacks without any formal process, denying migrants the chance to appeal when decisions go against them. In September 2024 alone, over 500 people in need of humanitarian assistance tried to enter Poland and there were 380 pushback actions, meaning that at least 380 people, but possibly many more, were forced back to the country they were coming from. Several court rulings have found these practices to be illegal and unconstitutional, but the government continues to treat migrants as part of Belarus’s plan to destabilise Poland.

The new migration strategy follows the same logic. The government believes the EU pact on migration and asylum is inadequate to deal with the crisis, but doesn’t go into much detail about why, other than to say that it doesn’t address the challenges posed by the ‘instrumentalisation of migration’. In response, it introduces a series of emergency measures aimed at strengthening state security and border protection. However, these changes are potentially incompatible with national law, EU law and international standards.

What are the most controversial elements of the new strategy?

The most radical element by far is the ‘temporary’ and ‘territorial’ suspension of the right to seek international protection. The document doesn’t explain what the suspension would look like in practice, how long it would last, which body would make the decision, or what procedures would be followed. If this suspension prevents people entering Poland to seek protection, it will violate the Polish Constitution, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention.

If the measure only limits where applications for protection can be accepted – for example, at a particular border crossing – and is indeed temporary and narrowly applied, it must be carefully managed to uphold the fundamental right to seek international protection. Even under such conditions, every applicant for protection should be recognised as such from the outset and should be granted all the associated rights. This includes the right to enter and stay in Poland while their application is being reviewed and guarantees of protection against forcible return, also known as the principle of non-refoulement.

However, statements by government officials suggest the planned suspension may take forms that would ultimately undermine the essence of the right to seek international protection. The government has also announced a ‘selective approach’ to migration in which decisions to allow people in would consider their ‘possibilities of integration in Polish society’ and whether they would ‘introduce uncertainty in the everyday life of Polish people’. This opens the door to prejudice, potentially closing the legal path to all whose cultural identity differs significantly from ours and limiting access to a select group of people.

What key issues are missing from the strategy?

The strategy briefly mentions the introduction of an ‘efficient migrant return system’ but fails to address Poland’s ongoing practice of pushing back migrants and forcing them to return to Belarus without due process, which is unconstitutional and incompatible with European and international law. There is a risk such inhumane and illegal practices will remain a permanent feature of Polish migration policy.

Another surprising omission is that of Ukrainian war refugees. It seems the government in the long term has no idea what to do with this substantial population, how to integrate them into our society, legalise their stay or give them access to the labour market, so it has preferred to say nothing about it.

How does Poland’s approach reflect broader European trends?

Unfortunately, Poland’s current approach is in line with a growing trend in Europe. More and more governments are criticising the EU’s migration policy as being ‘too liberal’. But human rights organisations usually argue the opposite. We believe the EU pact introduces many controversial and radical solutions.

Behind this shift in migration policy is a growing anti-migrant narrative fuelled by politicians and some media to scare people into demanding tougher migration policies from the government. The Polish government has not tried to counter people’s unfounded fears and anxieties about migrants –instead, it has consciously and deliberately reinforced them. This has created a vicious circle in which social fears shape policy and policy in turn reinforces these fears. The result is increasingly reactionary populist measures.

How does HFHR support migrants and counter anti-migrant sentiment?

Protecting the rights of migrants is at the core of our work. We advise people on the move on migration laws and how to access international protection, address administrative detentions and challenge illegal pushbacks. We also focus on strategic litigation and advocacy. We actively counter anti-migrant tendencies in laws and policies, highlight any gaps in the protection of migrants’ rights and suggest policy improvements. Through this work, we aim to shift the narrative towards a more balanced and rights-focused approach to migration.