How to improve protection standards? Lessons from the EU’s response to the displacement from Ukraine

1. 1. Allowing pendular external movements

By adopting a highly flexible approach to back-and-forth or “pendular” movements to and from Ukraine, the EU allowed persons covered by the TPD to maintain their family ties and address their personal and economic needs without losing their protection status in the EU.  Despite some implementation challenges and inconsistencies in Member State policies, as of September 2024, displaced persons from Ukraine continue to exercise this right, with nearly 39 million border crossings from and more than 35 million to Ukraine performed since 24 February 2022.

While extremely successful in this case,  explicitly granting the right to carry out pendular movements to/from Ukraine represents an exception. Beneficiaries of other forms of protection in the EU face a high risk of losing their protection status when they travel back to their country of origin.  International refugee law and EU secondary law, particularly the Qualification Directive (2011/95/EU), do not foresee specific sanctions in cases of pendular movements, but in practice visits or short-term returns to one’s country of nationality may be considered equal to re-availing oneself of the protection of the country of nationality. This may, in turn, lead to the withdrawal of the protection status.

1. 2. Ensuring rapid access to protection status and related rights

Immediate access to protection under the TPD granted people displaced from Ukraine direct access to rights deriving from protection, such as accommodation, employment, education, healthcare, and social welfare. In this sense, the TP regime differs from lengthy individual asylum procedures that may end up impeding and delaying societal inclusion. Moreover, the activation of the TPD significantly alleviated administrative burdens on national asylum systems by relaxing. requirements regarding necessary identity documents (e.g. accepting digital copies in the absence of the paper originals or proceeding with protection procedures even in the absence of documents).

1. 3. Enabling intra-EU freedom of movement

Finally, evidence from the implementation of the TPD shows that allowing intra-EU freedom of movement was advantageous to people and states alike., In relation to the former, the suspension of the “Dublin rule” under Article 11 of the TPD (which would have required provision of protection in the country of first entry)  by the Council Implementing Decision 2022/382 allowed persons displaced from Ukraine to exercise their agency and choose autonomously the country of TP application in line with their personal and professional needs. This also facilitated more prompt inclusion and family reunion.

At the same time, the suspension of this rule nonetheless resulted in an even distribution of responsibility across the EU Member states by facilitating onward  movement and easing pressure on border countries.