Eastern European countries refused to participate in the quota scheme | Wojtek Radwanski/AFP via Getty Images 3 EU countries broke law by refusing to take in refugees, says court lawyer Disregarding laws because they are unwelcome or unpopular ‘is a dangerous … step.’

Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic broke EU law by refusing to take part in a mandatory refugee quota scheme, according to a top lawyer at the EU's highest court.

In December 2017, the European Commission took the three Eastern European countries to the Court of Justice of the European Union over their refusal to participate in a one-off program for relocating across the bloc refugees who had arrived in Greece and Italy.

“These member states cannot invoke their responsibilities with regard to the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security in order to disapply a valid EU measure with which they disagree,” said a statement from Eleanor Sharpston, an advocate general at the court.

Sharpston said each EU country has to comply with its obligations under EU law and disregarding them because they are unwelcome or unpopular "is a dangerous first step towards the breakdown of the orderly and structured society governed by the rule of law.”

She said EU countries have to accept some “burden sharing” for the sake of solidarity.

The temporary scheme, introduced in 2015, was meant to redistribute 160 000 refugees from Africa and the Middle East after their arrival in Italy and Greece. Eastern European countries refused to participate in the scheme, citing security risks and claiming that accepting refugees would be too much of a burden. Hungary and Slovakia unsuccessfully tried to challenge the legality of the quota scheme at the CJEU.

At the time the case was taken to court, the Commission said Poland and Hungary hadn't taken in any refugees and the Czech Republic hadn't don't so for more than a year.

The Commission scrapped the scheme in September 2017 after fewer than 30 000 refugees were relocated.

The advocate general’s opinion is not binding but the court's final judgments generally take the same line.