When the Justice and Interior ministers of the 25-members of the EU came together in late May, a continuing debate over asylum policy was again on the agenda. They were hoping, this time, to come to a decision over which countries should be designated as "safe countries of origin" for asylum seekers -- countries from which illegal immigrants' claims would be automatically dismissed and sent back under a fast-track procedure.

The problem is that the European Commission can't agree if countries such as Mali, where women still live under the threat of female genital mutilation, should be placed on such a list. The same holds true for countries such as Benin, Botswana, Ghana, Mauritius, Senegal and Cape Verde, some of which ban homosexuality or still have the death penalty. They are all included in a draft proposal by EU Justice Commissioner Franco Frattini. Also, some officials complained that only African countries are on the list.

As a result, the ministers have postponed the decision again for a few weeks.

"We are going to review and integrate (the draft) not only with Africa but with countries from other continents," Frattini told reporters.

Preventing immigrants from "shopping"

In December, the EU approved a new law that will create a common policy toward immigrants and asylum seekers. It aims to prevent "shopping" by immigrants for countries with more lax rules in which they file multiple applications in numerous countries. Officials hope the law will also streamline and fast-track procedures for deportation.

Part of the push for the new initiative was a call from Spain, which has had to contend with thousands of illegal migrants recently: hundreds stormed the border around the Spanish enclaves of Melilla and Ceuta in Morocco last fall; 7,000 others have been trying over the past months to reach the Spanish Canary Islands by boat in order to gain asylum. As a result, the Spanish and other countries want their EU colleagues to agree to share the burden regarding illegal immigrants and refugees.

Agreeing on the list has been the major stumbling block and not just within the commission. For example, the European parliament opposed countries from North Africa such as Morocco or Libya from being placed on the list because of human rights concerns.

Human rights groups outraged

Human rights advocates say that the new law and a resulting list is no solution and that there is really no alternative to examining each asylum claim individually.

"The list is a mechanism that is not provided for in international human rights law," said Julia Duchrow of Amnesty International.

Other opponents say it politicizes asylum policy too much.

"What countries are on that list is essentially a political decision," said Anja Klug of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. "There is no mechanism that can truly guarantee whether a country is really safe and how much so."

Another problem is that many refugees come via a "third country" and can be returned there. As a result, some might be deported to countries deemed "safe" which truly aren't, critics say.

But Frattini said that a list will not rule out asylum claims from any so-called safe countries if refugees face "individual persecution and risk.

"There is no contradiction between a safe list and granting refugee status to someone from one of those countries," he said.