Helsinki adopts ‘pushback law’ to suspend asylum for migrants coming via Russia  

The Finnish Parliament passed a controversial law, on Friday (12 July), aimed at stopping asylum seekers at the Finnish-Russian border, with Moscow being accused of using migrants to put pressure on the Finnish borders. 

On Friday, the ‘exceptional law’ was passed allowing asylum procedures to be suspended, if Russia deliberately sends migrants to the Finnish-Russian border.

“Since the end of last year, we have seen Russia using migrants as an instrument of hybrid influence. Against our security, against our borders. Today the Parliament has approved the law by a clear majority,”  said Prime Minister Petteri Orpo (KoK, EPP).

Finland’s 1340 km border with Russia has been closed for seven months, the Helsinki government announcing mid April that it will extend the closure indefinitely, due to a growing number of arrivals from countries including Yemen, Syria and Somalia.  

Pushbacks and EU Law

This law allows de facto the controversial practice of returning migrants to a third country, often without following legal asylum procedures, known as pushback. 

Under European law, pushback is considered illegal as the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFREU) prohibit the return of people to countries, where they would be at risk of persecution or inhuman or degrading treatment. 

“No one should be worried that Finland will not be a state that respect the rule of law in the future and after this vote,” said Orpo.

The Finnish prime minister added that his government will promote a common European solution, and that the issue has already been discussed with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

“There is strong support from the Commission for maintaining border security. An uncontrolled entry route like the one in the Mediterranean is not wanted in the north either,” he added.

A Commission spokesperson told Euractiv that they are carefully analysing the new Finnish bill and if there were possible breaches of EU law. Making it clear that the EU will not tolerate any attempts to ‘instrumentalise’ migrants, and will continue to support member states in this regard.

“Member states have an obligation to protect their external borders. They are the ones best placed to define how they do this in practice, in full compliance with fundamental rights.”

The new ruling passed by the Finnish Parliament is an “exception law”, meaning that it creates an ad hoc exception to the Finnish Constitution in the case of a national emergency.

By its very nature, it is temporary, rarely used, requiring a hard-to-reach five-sixths majority in Parliament to support it. Children, people with disabilities and particularly vulnerable persons should not be prevented from entering the country.

“We hope that this law will never have to be applied, but that it will work as a preventive legislation,” concluded Minister of the Interior Mari Rantanen (Finns Party, ECR).

A divisive law 

The debates surrounding the adoption of the law led to deep tensions in the Finnish political landscape, with those members of the parliament (MP) expressing any disagreement with the law,  being accused of playing into the hands of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

During the debate preceding the vote, Ben Zyskowicz, spokesman for Prime minister Petteri Orpo’s Coalition Party (KoK, EPP), took a stand against the highly charged atmosphere surrounding the debate, in a bid to ease tensions.

“Opponents should not be stigmatised. They are not traitors, they are not on Putin’s side, they are not unpatriotic,” said Zyskowicz, adding that there were so many good arguments in favour of the law,  there was no need in resorting to such rhetoric.

After tough internal debates, the opposition Social Democratic Party voted with the majority in favour of the law, although six MPs required an exemption not to follow the party’s line.

The Greens, openly opposed the project and former Green party foreign minister Pekka Haavisto, declared that there are fundamental problems with the government’s proposal.

“Legislation with unclear legal effects should not be made in this hall,” he said.

Haavisto added that his country could have put forward an international initiatives for  broader joint action to combat illegal immigration, and proposed changes to international agreements,  which are now in conflict with the  passed law, according to him.

Even within the ranks of the current ruling coalition, the issue remains divisive.

Eva Biaudet of the governing RKP party (Swedish People’s party of Finland, Renew)  questioned in plenary whether the law would increase security at the eastern border.

“I don’t think you can demand that any lawmaker votes against international agreements and EU law,” she said  during the first reading of the law, questioning whether the law would help victims of human trafficking.

[Edited by Rajnish Singh]

Read more with Euractiv