‘Taking Back Control’: MCC Study Demands Shift Away From Brussels on Migration

The event, titled “Taking Back Control From Brussels: The Renationalization of EU Migration and Asylum Policies,” was organised by the Mathias Corvinus Collegium (MCC).

The conference marked the public presentation of a new study produced by MCC’s Center for European Studies and the Migration Research Institute in cooperation with the Polish legal think tank Ordo Iuris.

The study contends that after three decades of a “common” EU migration policy, Europe remains unable to provide an effective response to mass immigration.

The authors argue that the system is structurally incapable of success, citing judicial activism, restrictive international legal frameworks, ineffective deportation mechanisms, and compulsory relocation schemes as central causes of failure.

Opening the event, Balázs Orbán, political director of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, stated that the European Union had failed in addressing illegal migration. 

He noted that between 2015 and 2025, nearly ten million illegal migrants had arrived in Europe, warning that the numbers would continue to rise in the coming decades if current policies remained unchanged.

While some member states had succeeded in limiting illegal entries, Orbán argued that they had done so in opposition to EU institutions rather than with their support.

Hungary, he said, had established an effective border protection system resulting in zero illegal migrants entering the country, yet now faces daily fines of one million euros imposed by the European Court of Justice (ECJ).

According to Orbán, EU institutions and much of the European political elite continue to treat migration primarily as an opportunity rather than a security risk.

He added that parallel societies, national security threats, and social tensions have become part of everyday life in several Western European countries, with potential consequences for Central Europe as well.

Orbán also argued that effective action against illegal migration would require a fundamental overhaul of international humanitarian and refugee law. In his view, the existing global asylum framework—including the Geneva Convention, its subsequent protocols, and the legal practices built upon them at both international and EU levels—actively incentivises illegal migration rather than discouraging it.

Rodrigo Ballester, Head of MCC’s Center for European Studies, delivered a sharp critique of EU legal institutions, particularly the ECJ. He argued that courts consistently side with migrants at the expense of state authorities.

Ballester warned that the principle of subsidiarity has been hollowed out, with powers transferred to Brussels but never returned. If the EU is unable to manage migration effectively, Ballester said, competences should be handed back to national governments.

Viktor Marsai, Executive Director of the Migration Research Institute, argued that the asylum system itself acts as a powerful incentive. “Applying for asylum is basically a free ticket into Europe,” he said, claiming that migrants who reach EU territory have a very high likelihood of remaining.

He challenged the mainstream narrative that most arrivals are among the world’s poorest, noting that the cost of reaching Europe often runs into thousands of euros.

Marsai also pointed to the United States as an example of how political will can alter migration flows, arguing that President Donald Trump’s clear message that illegal migrants who do not leave voluntarily will be forcefully deported and will never be able to return has led to large-scale departures.

Jerzy Kwaśniewski, president and co-founder of Ordo Iuris, criticised the EU’s recently adopted Migration Pact, which enters into force this year. He argued that EU policy explicitly promotes migration as economically and culturally beneficial.

Kwaśniewski also warned against the growing influence of NGOs, accusing them of obstructing border enforcement and operating without democratic accountability. Judicial activism, he added, was increasingly prompting even liberal governments to question existing human rights mechanisms.

The MCC study proposes a three-pillar roadmap aimed at restoring national sovereignty over migration policy, making decision-making accountable to voters, and reasserting the role of member states in controlling borders—which, the authors argue, is the only viable path toward regaining control over Europe’s migration future.