Solidarity as one of the main values of the European Union is also recognizedamong the guiding principles of the EU asylum policy. In the period of the migrationcrisis, this principle was the most important for the EU Member Statesand very difficult to implement. The purpose of this article is to analyze the concept of solidarity, as enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty, as well as in the positions of the Member States and EU institutions. The article highlights the current debate, initiated by the Visegrad group under the Slovakian Presidency in the Council, around the proposed “flexible” or “effective solidarity” in asylum policy. Thus, the author contributes to understanding the ways, problems and prospects of refugees’ relocation, as well as the upcoming reform of the Dublin system. Based on the study of the summits conclusions, Council meetings in its various formats, the EU leaders’ statements, the author considers that divergence not only of the Member States positions, but also those of the EU institutions on the specific forms of participation in managing migration and asylum could entail more fragmentation and differentiation within the Union. At the same time, the author reveals the contradiction in the Visegrad countries’ position: while dreaming about re-nationalization of asylum and engaging in confrontation with the Commission the CEE countries by no means intend to introduce and maintain border control within the Schengen area.

W artykule ukazano przeobrażenia, jakie przeszły granice Polski od okresu powojennego, gdy w wyniku arbitralnych decyzji państw trzecich zostały zmienione przedwojenne usytuowanie i zasięg państwa polskiego, aż do dnia dzisiejszego, gdy status i funkcje granic III Rzeczpospolitej uległy gruntownej zmianie w wyniku członkostwa w UE i strefie Schengen. Szczególny nacisk położono na analizę trzech zasadniczych zmian statusu politycznego i funkcji kontrolnych tych granic. Pierwsza odnosi się do ustanowienia typowych dla ówczesnych krajów komunistycznych restrykcyjnych zasad ochrony i przekraczania granic tak przez obywateli polskich, jak i obywateli państw trzecich. Druga związana jest z radykalną zmianą zasad ochrony i kontroli polskich granic wraz z transformacją ustrojową i gospodarczą Polski na początku lat 90. XX w., polegającą na względnym otwarciu wszystkich polskich granic na przepływ ludzi i towarów. Trzeci proces przeobrażeń polskich granic stanowi efekt integrowania się Polski z UE i jej przystąpienia do strefy Schengen. Polega na dywersyfikacji polskich granic na granice wewnętrzne i zewnętrzne UE, co istotnie zmienia nie tylko ich funkcje kontrolne, ale także status polityczny. Ukazanie powyższych zmian uzewnętrznia zmieniającą się naturę polityczną polskiego państwa i jego suwerenności. Analizy prowadzone są w ujęciu politologicznym, w oparciu o źródła instytucjonalno-prawne i literaturę przedmiotu.

In this research paper the author considers the problematic aspects of interaction of bodies (units) of state border protection and customs of the State Customs Service of Ukraine during the detection of signs of violations of customs rules, as well as the indentifying property that has no owner or owner unknown at border crossings. entry-exit checkpoint, in the controlled border area. At the same time, the current state of legal regulation of this issue, the main legislative developments in this area, which took place in connection with the joint order of the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine number 849/828, foreign approaches to cooperation between customs and border units. Based on the study, it was concluded that the issues of cooperation between state border guards and customs of the State Customs Service of Ukraine are regulated by the updated Procedure number 849/828, approved by a joint order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine. a number of powers from the administrative-operational group to draw up reports on administrative offenses, to send an act of detection, and on the property of the owner, who is unknown or as has no owner - transfer of property to the relevant department of the State Customs Service of Ukraine, to other officials of state border guards, and also extended the validity of this document not only to cases of violations of customs rules, property whose owner has no owner or whose owner is unknown, detected at checkpoints across the state border of Ukraine, but also for similar cases detected at the checkpoint of entry-exit, in the controlled border area. At the same time, the mentioned Procedure number 849/828 does not solve a number of urgent issues of such interaction, such as: insufficiently effective coordination of work of state border guards and customs of the State Customs Service of Ukraine on ensuring unity of customs and border control, impossibility to send a representative protection of the state border (units of protection of the state border) and customs of the State Customs Service of Ukraine, carrying out separate control in cases when it is necessary to carry out joint control, lack of interest in such interaction, lack of a specific list of reasons when a joint inspection should be conducted, lack of sanctions for failure to conduct a joint inspection in case of detection of goods moving in violation of customs rules and border legislation without sufficient reasons. Therefore, a solution to these problems is proposed.

The paper presents a proposal of a new perspective as regards the way of defining the EU’s policy concerning the functional dimension of its borders. Thus, it comprises a counterproposal to the narrow definition of the whole policy, limited to the issues of border control and the principles of border crossing. In this approach, the EU’s border policy constitutes a kind of political framework for three programmes, implemented under three separate sectors of this policy, programmes of the EU activity oriented towards: cross-border cooperation of local communities; the establishment of tightened control and border protection and finally the stabilisation of the EU outside its borders. This is a three – dimensional, internally diverse policy of the EU, the implementation of which – depending on the dimension – is carried out by means of financial, legal or political instruments. This proposal constitutes a more complex approach to the analysis of the EU policy towards its borders and provides the opportunity to consider a particular EU border from the perspective of the level of isolation of border areas, the degree of permeability of the border control regime and of the “friendliness” or “hostility” of relations with neighbouring countries. It seems that such a perspective can better convey the diverse character of the EU’s external borders and determine their actual level of openness or closeness.

The analysis aims to reconstruct, explain and evaluate the position of the Polish government on the essential elements of the EU migration and asylum policy proposed by the European Commission in the New Pact on Migration and Asylum. Thus, the article discusses the potential priorities and objectives of the EU migration and asylum policy from the point of view of the Polish government, articulated both during the ongoing work on the EC document (2018–2020) and after its publication in September 2020. However, the article is not intended to present the Polish government’s position on the particular, detailed solutions contained in the legislative proposals of the EC due to the New Pact on Migration and Asylum. Although, it allows identifying what the Polish side considers desirable, tolerable and acceptable, and what is utterly unacceptable in terms of the proposed changes to EU migration and asylum policy. Therefore, the main priorities of the Polish government regarding the reformed policy are indicated and explained. The first two concern counteracting irregular immigration by enhancing the protection of external borders and intensifying cooperation with third countries (in particular as concerns readmissions and returns), which means approving the postulates of the EC. At the same time, the third priority opposes the EC’s proposal addressing asylum issues.