Journal articles: 'Common European Asylum System'

1

Gallagher, Stephen. "Towards a Common European Asylum System." International Journal: Canada's Journal of Global Policy Analysis 57, no. 3 (September 2002): 375–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002070200205700305.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Adijāne, Iveta. "ASYLUM PROCEDURE IN LATVIA - A PART OF COMMON EUROPEAN ASYLUM SYSTEM." BORDER SECURITY AND MANAGEMENT 2, no. 7 (July 5, 2018): 7. http://dx.doi.org/10.17770/bsm.v2i7.3494.

Full text

Abstract:

The Common European Asylum System (CEAS) conditions apply to Latvia. Development of the Common European Asylum System impacts Latvian legislation and has an effect on the work of judicial institutions. Any European Union scale change affects Latvia. Common European Asylum System conditions in Latvia are being met by direct implementation of the EU instructions. Well-considered position and evaluation of CEAS conditions according to Latvian interests is necessary. Goal of this article is to review demands of the Common European Asylum System towards the member states as well as concordance of the Latvian asylum procedure with conditions of the Common European Asylum System. Objectives of this research is to examine development of legislation in the EU and Latvia, to analyse and compare current legislation of the asylum procedure in the EU member states as well as to analyse impact of CEAS towards the asylum procedure in Latvia. In order to achieve objectives, following research methods were used: monographic research of theoretical and empirical sources in order to analyse and evaluate various asylum domain information, analytical method in order to acquire legislative content and verities, comparative method in order to discover differences in legislation of asylum procedure in the EU countries, systemic method in order to disclose interconnections in legislation, descriptive statistics method and correlation analysis in order to analyse process of the asylum procedure and determine interconnections in the asylum procedure time frame between legislation and practical instances in EU countries.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Petracou, E., G. Domazakis, G. Papayiannis, and A. Yannacopoulos. "Towards a Common European Space for Asylum." Sustainability 10, no. 9 (August 21, 2018): 2961. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su10092961.

Full text

Abstract:

In this paper, we provide a critical overview of the current migration policies of the EU as framed by the recent amendments of the EU migration policies since 2015. We highlight that the construction of the migration policy is a constitutive element of the spatial process of reorganization of territorial policies through the combination and diffusion of state, regional and global. We show that the perception of permanent and static migration pressure, and countries’ specialization in migration are the basis for diffusion of asylum and migration policies to a number of different countries imposing similar migration systems and establishing a global governance of migration regime. The paper highlights a geographic and political change in migration and border management, through the patterns of EU Member States cooperation, and in particular their reluctance to establish a common asylum system based on solidarity and the focus on substituting the lack of a common asylum system by bilateral externalization agreements the main objective of which is the management of migration and border control rather than guaranteeing asylum and refugee policies.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Parusel, Bernd. "Solidarity and fairness in the Common European Asylum System – failure or progress?" Migration Letters 12, no. 2 (May 1, 2015): 124–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.33182/ml.v12i2.247.

Full text

Abstract:

On the basis of harmonised statistical data on asylum applications and decisions, this paper attempts to re-examine the state of play of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), and in particular, the two key objectives of achieving a more balanced distribution of asylum seekers across Member States (“solidarity”) and the approximation of national decision-making in asylum cases (“fairness”). It concludes that while there is evidence of unresolved challenges, such as lately with regard to the uneven reception and treatment of asylum seekers from Syria, some fragile trends of progress can be detected in terms of more uniform asylum outcomes.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Lambert, Hélène. "TRANSNATIONAL JUDICIAL DIALOGUE, HARMONIZATION AND THE COMMON EUROPEAN ASYLUM SYSTEM." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 58, no. 3 (July 2009): 519–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589309001249.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIncreased policy harmonization on refugee matters in the European Union (EU), namely the creation of a Common European Asylum System (CEAS), has created the imperative for a transnational judicial comparative dialogue between national courts. This article is based on a structured, focused comparison approach to examining a key element of a transnational European legal dialogue, namely, the use of foreign law by national judges when making their own decisions on asylum. It does so by examining two countries, France and Britain, as representative of the difference in legal tradition and culture within the EU in terms of the civil–common law divide. Both case studies are structured around a common set of empirical and jurisprudential research questions. The empirical findings reveal a surprising lack of transnational use of national jurisprudence on asylum between judges. Nonetheless, a slight but noticeable increase in the use of transnational asylum jurisprudence in the British and French courts must be noted. Two broad accounts—one rational, the other cultural—are applied in each of the case studies to explain this empirical finding. This article concludes on the broader implications of these findings for the establishment of a CEAS by 2012.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Muraszkiewicz, Julia. "Reforming the Common European Asylum System: The New European Refugee Law." International Journal of Refugee Law 29, no. 2 (June 2017): 382–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eex028.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Mitsilegas, Valsamis. "Solidarity and Trust in the Common European Asylum System." Comparative Migration Studies 2, no. 2 (June 2014): 181–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.5117/cms2014.2.mits.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Hatton, Timothy J. "European Asylum Policy." National Institute Economic Review 194 (October 2005): 106–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0027950105061503.

Full text

Abstract:

Policy towards asylum seekers has been a controversial topic for more than a decade. Rising numbers of asylum applications have been met with ever-tougher policies to deter them. Following a period of policy harmonisation, the EU has reached a crucial stage in the development of a new Common European Asylum System. This paper seeks to shed light on what form this should take. It summarises the development of policy to date and it argues that these policies have been too tough, even from the point of view of EU citizens. Using an economic framework, it examines scenarios with different degrees of policy harmonisation and integration among EU countries. Finally, it argues that there is an important role for enhanced burden-sharing arrangements.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Adijāne, Iveta. "CHALLENGES AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE ASYLUM SYSTEM IN THE EUROPEAN UNION." BORDER SECURITY AND MANAGEMENT 3, no. 8 (October 20, 2020): 54–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.17770/bsm.v3i8.5359.

Full text

Abstract:

There still is a lack of unity among EU Member States on asylum issues, both, in the practical application of the existing legal framework and in the direction of the common asylum system. Latvia is subject of both international and European Union common asylum conditions. Any changes in the scale of the European Union affect Latvia, and the world situation in the field of refugees also affects our country. The aim of this article is to analyse the current situation of asylum in the EU, touching upon main trends in the world of refugees, and to identify the main problems in the existing asylum procedure in the EU. In order to achieve objectives, following research methods were used: monographic research of theoretical and empirical sources in order to analyse and evaluate various asylum domain information, analytical method in order to acquire legislative content and verities, comparative method in order to discover differences in legislation of asylum procedure in EU countries, systemic method in order to disclose interconnections in legislation, descriptive statistics method and correlation analysis in order to analyse process of asylum procedure and determine interconnections in asylum procedure time frame between legislation and practical instances in EU countries.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Adijāne, Iveta. "CHALLENGES AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE ASYLUM SYSTEM IN THE EUROPEAN UNION." BORDER SECURITY AND MANAGEMENT 3, no. 8 (October 20, 2020): 54–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.17770/bsm.v3i8.5359.

Full text

Abstract:

There still is a lack of unity among EU Member States on asylum issues, both, in the practical application of the existing legal framework and in the direction of the common asylum system. Latvia is subject of both international and European Union common asylum conditions. Any changes in the scale of the European Union affect Latvia, and the world situation in the field of refugees also affects our country. The aim of this article is to analyse the current situation of asylum in the EU, touching upon main trends in the world of refugees, and to identify the main problems in the existing asylum procedure in the EU. In order to achieve objectives, following research methods were used: monographic research of theoretical and empirical sources in order to analyse and evaluate various asylum domain information, analytical method in order to acquire legislative content and verities, comparative method in order to discover differences in legislation of asylum procedure in EU countries, systemic method in order to disclose interconnections in legislation, descriptive statistics method and correlation analysis in order to analyse process of asylum procedure and determine interconnections in asylum procedure time frame between legislation and practical instances in EU countries.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Inglese, Marco. "The Right to Healthcare in the Common European Asylum System." European Journal of Migration and Law 20, no. 2 (May 30, 2018): 135–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340026.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract This article seeks to ascertain the role of healthcare in the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). The article is structured as follows. First, it outlines the international conceptualisation of healthcare in the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the European Social Charter (ESC) before delving into the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Second, focusing on the European Union (EU), it analyses the role of Article 35 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter) in order to verify its impact on the development of the CEAS. Third, and in conclusion, it will argue that the identification of the role of healthcare in the CEAS should be understood in light of the Charter’s scope of application. This interpretative approach will be beneficial for asylum seekers and undocumented migrants, as well as for the Member States (MSs).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Rijpma, Jorrit, Maarten den Heijer, and Thomas Spijkerboer. "Coercion, prohibition, and great expectations: The continuing failure of the Common European Asylum System." Common Market Law Review 53, Issue 3 (June 1, 2016): 607–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/cola2016059.

Full text

Abstract:

This contribution explains the European asylum policy crisis from three structural weaknesses of the Common European Asylum System: its reliance on coercion within the EU, its unrealistic expectations of what borders can achieve and the premise of prohibition of refugee movement in its external dimension. The article then critically reviews the proposals that the EU has submitted since the publication of the European Migration Agenda in May 2015, in the light of recent developments.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Pirjola, Jari. "European Asylum Policy ‐ Inclusions and Exclusions under the Surface of Universal Human Rights Language." European Journal of Migration and Law 11, no. 4 (2009): 347–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157181609789804277.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe tension between universal human rights commitments and particular interests of the EU or its Member States is at the heart of the creation of a common asylum system. This article explores some of the inherent and structural contradictions as well as the sometimes hidden paradoxes that affect the creation of common asylum policies. The development of the European asylum system is examined as a process of including and excluding. It is argued that open, abstract and empty human rights commitments can provide only limited guidance on how to develop migration and asylum policies in Europe. We should not try to hide the development of the European asylum system behind the obscurity of legal reasoning or institutionalized rights language, but see the emerging common asylum system as a result of different and often conflicting priorities, power struggles and ideological influences.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Weber, Franziska. "Labour Market Access for Asylum Seekers and Refugees under the Common European Asylum System." European Journal of Migration and Law 18, no. 1 (March 15, 2016): 34–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12342089.

Full text

Abstract:

The paper identifies a policy inconsistency between the eu’s asylum and the eu’s labour migration policies and makes a call for stronger convergence. The analysis starts off by setting out the eu’s current and future economic challenges with a view to its ageing population and low fertility rates, which displays the eu’s need for migrants. Two trends can be observed: The lacking success of Europe’s highly-skilled regime, i.e. the Blue Card scheme, casts doubts on the suitability of the eu’s labour migration policy and its ability to meet the eu’s labour market’s needs this way. Labour market access for people that come to the eu to seek asylum on the other hand is subject to quite a number of restrictions. The lack of coordination seems short-sighted. In an attempt to advocate for stronger coherence the paper sets out the rights to access the eu labour market of those who come to the eu as asylum seekers in detail and explores reform potential where these rights can be expanded consistent with the eu’s labour market needs. It looks at eu law in general and refers to Germany as an implementation example.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Guild, Elspeth. "SEEKING COHERENCE AMONG MEMBER STATES: THE COMMON EUROPEAN ASYLUM SYSTEM." Spanish Yearbook of International Law 23 (December 31, 2019): 183–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.17103/sybil.23.10.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Anagnostaras, Georgios. "The Common European Asylum System: Balancing Mutual Trust Against Fundamental Rights Protection." German Law Journal 21, no. 6 (September 2020): 1180–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/glj.2020.72.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe Common European Asylum System constitutes one of the principal areas in which the fundamental rights of individuals are essentially placed in competition with the core principle of mutual confidence and the need to preserve the effectiveness of EU law. That competitive relationship becomes particularly evident when applicants for international protection rely on alleged violations of their fundamental rights in order to contest their transfer to the Member State that is normally responsible for examining their asylum request according to the criteria of the Dublin III Regulation. The balancing process that needs to be carried out in this respect and the measure of the monitoring obligation that EU law imposes on the receiving Member State regarding the protection of the fundamental rights of asylum seekers are well exemplified by the preliminary ruling in Jawo. That case provides additional clarification regarding the circumstances in which the protection of fundamental rights may introduce exceptions to the principle of mutual trust. At the same time, it illustrates the inherent tensions that exist between the protection of fundamental rights and the application of the principle of mutual confidence.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

García-Juan, Laura. "Integration Measures within the Reform of the Common European Asylum System: The Unsolved Limbo of Asylum Seekers." Migration Letters 17, no. 5 (September 28, 2020): 597–608. http://dx.doi.org/10.33182/ml.v17i5.845.

Full text

Abstract:

The European Union has proved to be ineffective in covering the needs of millions of people who seek asylum, while trying to satisfy the security claims of the Member States. The EU institutions have decided to reform the Common European Asylum System to coordinate the procedures, requirements, and conditions for acceptance, aiming to harmonise the national legislative frameworks. One of the most notorious aspects is the extension of the integration measures and conditions to asylum seekers. Nonetheless, the new rules still fail to offer a solution for those asylum requests that are going to be denied after long waiting periods even if the applicants have benefited from the integration programs. In order to avoid such legal implications for the long-term asylum seekers, this article encourages the EU institutions to adopt an ultimate solution, even if a bit creative, that would be coherent with the goals of the CEAS reforms.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Kodaneva, S. I. "COMMON EUROPEAN ASYLUM SYSTEM: THE CAUSES OF THE CRISIS AND ITS CONSEQUENCES FOR EUROPEAN CONSTITUTIONALISM." Pravovedenie IAZH, no. 4 (2021): 81–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.31249/rgpravo/2021.04.06.

Full text

Abstract:

The massive influx of refugees from the Middle East in 2015 caused a crisis in the Common European Asylum System, which provoked a European constitutional crisis. This review presents three articles that formulate the existing problems and the risks they cause for the EU, as well as analyzing their causes and prerequisites.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Mushak, N. "LEGAL PROTECTION OF THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION." ACTUAL PROBLEMS OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1, no. 127 (2016): 95–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/apmv.2016.127.1.95-103.

Full text

Abstract:

The article is devoted to the legal analysis of the EU common policy in order to provide protection to third country nationals. To control the issues caused by a significant increase of the number of asylum seekers and refugees into the territory of the EU Member States the European Union is developing a common policy on asylum and protection of third-country nationals crossing the external borders of the EU Member States. The EU common policy in this area is the European Union coordination policy to establish common rules for asylum for third-country nationals; establish common rules to provide the additional security for third-country nationals who without obtaining the European asylum in whole, however, need the international protection; to create a common system of temporary protection for displaced persons in regard of their substantial influx; to determine common procedures for granting and withdrawing of a single asylum status or additional protection. Special attention is paid to the analysis of the asylum procedure of third-country nationals. As well as issues related to the protection of external borders, visa and immigration policies TFEU predicts a joint adoption by the European Parliament and the Council decision under the ordinary legislative procedure, id est voting for proposal of the EU Commission. Simultaneously, under the TFEU, if within one or more EU Member States there is an emergency situation characterized by a sudden influx of third-country nationals, the EU Council for the EU Commission proposal and acting after the consultations with the European Parliament may adopt temporary measures in favor of the interesting Member States. Nowadays the European Union is in dynamic and permanent development process of a common policy to provide protection to third-country nationals. This policy is implemented through the use of the EU method of coordination in matters relating to the establishment of the common status of asylum for third-country nationals; determining the status of a common additional protection for third-country nationals; the introduction of a common system of temporary protection for displaced persons; establishing of common procedures for granting and withdrawing of a common asylum status or additional protection.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Arnold, Samantha, Martine Goeman, and Katja Fournier. "The Role of the Guardian in Determining the Best Interest of the Separated Child Seeking Asylum in Europe: A Comparative Analysis of Systems of Guardianship in Belgium, Ireland and the Netherlands." European Journal of Migration and Law 16, no. 4 (November 14, 2014): 467–504. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12342066.

Full text

Abstract:

Separated children seeking asylum in Europe have the right to a representative, typically in the form of a guardian, and the right to have their best interests taken into account. These rights are articulated in the Council Directives and Regulations regulating the Common European Asylum System. The original language used around the time of developing the Common European Asylum System related to ‘harmonisation’. This article, therefore, looks at the level of harmonisation of the systems of guardianship, and the guardians’ responsibility to determine and promote the best interest, for separated children seeking asylum in Europe. The article begins by defining the guardian and the best interest principle and outlining the relevant law, which presently exists in Europe. Three case studies were chosen to provide current examples of the differences in practice in Europe, namely: Belgium, Ireland and the Netherlands. The question dealt with in this article is to what extent the three case study countries meet the minimum standards set out in European law in respect of guardianship and the best interests of separated children seeking asylum.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Doomernik, Jeroen, and Birgit Glorius. "The Future of the Common European Asylum System: Dystopian or Utopian Expectations?" Social Inclusion 10, no. 3 (July 27, 2022): 1–3. http://dx.doi.org/10.17645/si.v10i3.5954.

Full text

Abstract:

After the end of the Cold War, a decade started within which the idea of European unity gained considerable traction. The Maastricht Treaty transformed the Economic Community into the European Union and the scope of collaboration between its member states widened to include justice and home affairs. By the end of the decade, it had become clear this was not enough to address the challenges caused by refugee migration. Thus the Amsterdam Treaty aimed at proper joint policy and law‐making in the sphere of migration and asylum. This ought to be done with full respect to the 1951 Refugee Convention. By 2004, when the Union was joined by ten new member states, the essence of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) had been formulated and turned into Regulations and Directives as part of the Union’s body of common law. The system was further fine‐tuned during the next decade, but during the 2015 “refugee crisis” the system collapsed for lack of solidarity and solid agreements on responsibility‐sharing between the member states. Since then, the single goal member states share is that asylum seekers and refugees are best kept from finding a way into Europe—for once they arrive political stress is the unavoidable consequence. Paradoxically, precisely the ideal of a CEAS has introduced practices that deviate from the EU’s norms regarding international protection. This thematic issue reviews some of those issues but also finds examples of harmonization and good practices.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Gallagher, Stephen. "Towards a Common European Asylum System: Fortress Europe Redesigns the Ramparts." International Journal 57, no. 3 (2002): 375. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/40203674.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Dorig, H. "German Courts and their Understanding of the Common European Asylum System." International Journal of Refugee Law 25, no. 4 (December 1, 2013): 768–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eeu002.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Smyth, Ciara. "Is the Right of the Child to Liberty Safeguarded in the Common European Asylum System?" European Journal of Migration and Law 15, no. 2 (2013): 111–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12342027.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract It is well-known and the subject of much criticism that children seeking asylum in many EU Member States are detained, a situation that is facilitated by the detention provisions of key instruments of the Common European Asylum System. Sometimes the detention is said to be justified on the grounds that it is protective detention. But generally, detention of children is regarded as being inimical to the protection and care of children. For this reason, the Convention on the Rights of the Child has developed stringent standards for the detention of minors to ensure that they are protected from detention and, if detained, that they are protected in detention. As negotiations close on the instruments that will make up Phase Two of the Common European Asylum System, this article explores whether the existing and future instruments safeguard the right of the child to liberty.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Dreyer-Plum, Domenica. "Commitment of States, Access to Asylum, and Material Benefits: Assessing Key Legislative Battles and Their Structural Impact on the Common European Asylum System." International Journal of Refugee Law 31, no. 4 (December 2019): 516–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eez042.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract In 2015, the movement of asylum seekers to the European Union (EU) increased dramatically and led to the factual invalidation of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). From the beginning, the European Commission’s objective was to create a fair system guaranteeing a European-wide protection status in line with the standards contained in the 1951 Refugee Convention. In order to understand why this system failed, it is important to look closely at the applicable laws. Which regulations were based on the Amsterdam and Lisbon treaty mandates? What were the key disputes and which normative solution was pushed through? Scholarly attention so far has focused on either external aspects of border policy or institutional and policy issues within the EU. By contrast, this article argues that the central gaps in the system present a multifaceted set of problems with three main weaknesses: the neglected geographic asymmetry enshrined in the European asylum system; a reliance on national standards that runs through all the legislative processes; and the over-emphasis of asylum rights in contrast to an under-regulation of access to asylum. This combination of problems helps to explain the rise of a serious protection crisis in Europe following the influx in 2015, a crisis that remains largely unresolved. These inherent weaknesses are analysed through an examination of key disputes in the legislative process establishing the CEAS. The article traces the different positions of the European institutions in the legislation process and assesses the shortcomings of the emergent system in two periods: during the establishment of this system from 1999 to 2005, and the reform period from 2008 to 2013. The article concludes with reflections on the current reform phase. The findings point to ineffective laws, unresolved normative disputes, and the need for further reforms to achieve a harmonized CEAS in line with treaty mandates.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Storey, Hugo. "Seeking Asylum in the European Union: Selected Protection Issues Raised by the Second Phase of the Common European Asylum System." International Journal of Refugee Law 29, no. 3 (October 2017): 512–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eex037.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Goodwin-Gill, Guy S. "Bundesrepublik Deutschland v. Kaveh Puid (E.C.J.)." International Legal Materials 53, no. 2 (April 2014): 341–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.5305/intelegamate.53.2.0341.

Full text

Abstract:

The judgment in Bundesrepublik Deutschland v. Kaveh Puid concerns the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) and, in particular, the “Dublin Rules,” the intra-European arrangement that governs which State shall be responsible for determining a claim to asylum. This process began under the 1990 Dublin Convention, which was replaced by European Union (EU) Regulation 343/2003, commonly referred to as “Dublin II” (Dublin Regulation).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Wróbel, Izabela Małgorzata. "EXTREME MATERIAL POVERTY AS A NEGATIVE PREREQUISITE FOR THE TRANSFER OF AN APPLICANT FOR INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION TO THE COMPETENT MEMBER STATE AND FOR THE REJECTION OF AN APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT OF REFUGEE STATUS AS BEING INADMISSIBLE." Review of European and Comparative Law 37, no. 2 (January 27, 2020): 139–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.31743/recl.4817.

Full text

Abstract:

The essential measures for a common European asylum system adopted by the EU institutions include the Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 and the Directive 2013/32/EU. These acts relate to the various stages of the functioning of the common European asylum system, however, there may be a risk of a violation of the fundamental rights of applicants as set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, including the prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4 of the Charter), at both stages. Such a risk may arise as a result of deficiencies in asylum systems of the Member States. If these deficiencies are to fall within the scope of Article 4 of the Charter, they must attain a particularly high level of severity, which depends on all the circumstances of the case. An example of attaining this particularly high level of severity is the situation of extreme material poverty. As acts of the EU asylum law do not contain the terms “particularly high level of severity” and “extreme material poverty” and all the more they do not define them, guidelines on how to interpret and apply Article 4 of the Charter in the context of the common European asylum system should be sought in the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU. Therefore, the aim of the article is to explore and attempt to generalise and develop the basis and the criteria indicated by the CJEU for assessing the actual nature of deficiencies in the asylum system of the Member State in question from the point of view of the prohibition laid down in Article 4 of the Charter, with particular emphasis on the criterion of a particularly high level of severity and the situation of extreme material poverty which meets this criterion.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Nanopoulos, Eva. "TRUST ISSUES AND THE EUROPEAN COMMON ASYLUM SYSTEM: FINDING THE RIGHT BALANCE." Cambridge Law Journal 72, no. 2 (July 2013): 276–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197313000433.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Gray, Harriet. "Surveying the Foundations: Article 80 TFEU and the Common European Asylum System." Liverpool Law Review 34, no. 3 (November 2013): 175–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10991-013-9138-8.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Odello, Marco. "Reforming the Common European Asylum System – Legislative Developments and Judicial Activism of the European Courts." International Journal of Refugee Law 27, no. 3 (August 27, 2015): 519–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijrl/eev042.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Stefanelli, Justine N. "II. WHOSE RULE OF LAW? AN ANALYSIS OF THE UK'S DECISION NOT TO OPT-IN TO THE EU ASYLUM PROCEDURES AND RECEPTION CONDITIONS DIRECTIVES." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 60, no. 4 (October 2011): 1055–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589311000492.

Full text

Abstract:

The United Kingdom (‘UK’) has indicated its intention not to opt-in to two proposals from the European Commission aimed at further developing the Common European Asylum System through the replacement of existing instruments on asylum procedures and reception conditions. The purpose of the European Union (‘EU’) amendment process is to establish rules that more closely align the legal framework for asylum in the Member States so that asylum seekers receive the same higher standard of treatment in any Member State in which they choose to make their application, and to address criticism that the Directives are incompatible with human rights obligations. The UK asserts that its asylum procedures satisfy the standards imposed by its obligations under international and European law, and does not view further harmonization of asylum matters at EU level as necessary or appropriate. Its decision not to opt-in raises issues regarding sovereignty, subsidiarity, the rule of law and European integration. This article will explore these issues, as well as provide an overview of select provisions from the proposals in light of UK asylum policy.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Bendel, Petra. "Immigration Policy in the European Union: Still bringing up the walls for fortress Europe?" Migration Letters 2, no. 1 (April 1, 2005): 20–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.33182/ml.v2i1.18.

Full text

Abstract:

Immigration and asylum policies in the European Union have entered into a new period. The author sums up the most important achievements and failures of the EU's efforts to create a common European asylum and immigration system, and she evaluates the new Hague Programme of the European Council (November 2004) in the light of the hitherto existing policies. She concludes that the European Council's new programme lags behind the more promising guidelines of its predecessor of Tampere.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Adijāne, Iveta, and Jolanta Gaigalniece-Zelenova. "ACCELERATED ASYLUM PROCEDURE IN LATVIA, LEGAL AND PRACTICAL ASPECTS." BORDER SECURITY AND MANAGEMENT 4, no. 9 (February 17, 2023): 71–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.17770/bsm.v4i9.7041.

Full text

Abstract:

Recent years have brought many challenges to all countries of the European Union in the field of immigration and asylum. Latvia, in the process of involving into the common European asylum system, has made different practical actions to improve the asylum procedure. Being a European Union country Latvia is subordinated to common changes in the field of asylum that are now in process of realization. But the events of recent years have influenced the sphere of asylum. These are: COVID-19, hybrid threat and situation at the Belarus border and recent events concerning situation in Ukraine. The authors have studied most current events during recent years focusing on questions on the topic. The aim of this article is to analyse the current situation of asylum in the EU, touching upon main trends in the world of refugees, to identify the main problems in the existing asylum procedure in the EU, in order to define the accelerated asylum procedure in the legal basis and in practical life, and to offer solutions. The object of the article is the asylum system. The subject of the article is the accelerated asylum procedure. In order to achieve objectives, following research methods were used: monographic research of theoretical and empirical sources in order to analyse and evaluate various asylum domain information, analytical method in order to acquire legislative content and verities, historical method, comparative method, systemic method, descriptive statistics method and correlation analysis, methods of interpretation of legal norms: grammatical method of interpretation, the historical method of interpretation, teleological method of interpretation and the systemic method of interpretation of legal provisions.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Levy, Carl. "The European Union after 9/11: The Demise of a Liberal Democratic Asylum Regime?" Government and Opposition 40, no. 1 (2005): 26–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2005.00142.x.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis article examines the domestic and international pressures since 11 September 2001 on the liberal democratic asylum regime practised within the European Union. It looks at three areas of confrontation. The pressures exerted upon national governments by anti-immigrant and anti-asylum seeker/refugee far right populist parties. It examines the attempts by the European Union and its member states to arrive at a Common European Asylum System in light of policy developments over the past 20 years, and places these long-standing processes within the events of 11 September 2001. It discusses whether or not the liberal democratic tradition of asylum embodied in the Geneva Convention of 1951 been sacrificed to the dual pressures of the electoral victories of the far right in Europe and a new form of terrorism that threatens European societies.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Lieven, Sophie. "Case Report on C-411/10, N.S. and C-493/10, M.E. and Others, 21 December 2011." European Journal of Migration and Law 14, no. 2 (2012): 223–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157181612x642385.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The European Court of Justice clarified through this judgment the way in which the overloading of a Member States’ asylum system affects the EU arrangements for determining the Member State responsible for asylum applications lodged in the EU and thereby drastically reduced the possibility granted to Member States to transfer asylum applicants. The Member States now have an obligation to verify that no serious risk of violation of the Charter rights of the applicant exits in the receiving country before being allowed to transfer the person. The practical consequences of this ruling are still uncertain but further cooperation between Member States should be able to enhance the level of protection of human rights within the Common European Asylum System.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Abbing, Henriette D. C. Roscam. "Age Determination of Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Minors in the European Union: A Health Law Perspective." European Journal of Health Law 18, no. 1 (2011): 11–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157180911x546101.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn the European Union, unaccompanied asylum seekers below 18 years of age are entitled to specific treatment. Age assessment practices to verify the age-statement by the asylum seeker differ between EU Member States. Medical methods in use raise questions about accuracy, reliability and safety. The medical, legal and ethical acceptability of invasive methods (notably X-rays) in particular is controversial. Human rights are at stake. The lack of common practices results in different levels of protection (discrimination). The absence of standardisation is an obstacle for the functioning of the Common European Asylum System. EU Best Practice Guidelines should remedy the situation; such guidelines should reflect the best interest of the child.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Dupont, Pier-Luc. "La Spina, Encarnación. 2020. La vulnerabilidad de las personas refugiadas ante el reto de la integración. Cizur Menor: Aranzadi Thomson Reuters. 251 p." Deusto Journal of Human Rights, no. 9 (June 30, 2022): 167–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.18543/djhr.2469.

Full text

Abstract:

Drawing on European and comparative jurisprudence and reports, this book review synthesises minimal legal standards and discretionary policies aiming to mitigate vulnerability and promote integration among asylum seekers, refugees and beneficiaries of international protection. It also highlights some of the gaps and inconsistencies that remain to be resolved for the Common European Asylum System to adequately protect the human rights of persons subjected to multiple, intersectional factors of vulnerability.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Schmälter, Julia. "A European response to non-compliance: the Commission’s enforcement efforts and the Common European Asylum System." West European Politics 41, no. 6 (February 7, 2018): 1330–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2018.1427947.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

van Reenen, Pieter. "Impartiality in the EU Asylum Procedure." European Journal of Migration and Law 20, no. 3 (September 12, 2018): 338–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340032.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The Asylum Procedures Directive stipulates that asylum applications are examined ‘impartially’ by the national authorities. This paper explores the meaning of the term impartiality in administrative settings in EU asylum law focussing on three levels: the Common European Asylum System, the administrative organisational level and the level of the individual immigration officer. CEAS does not provide for a definition of impartiality. The article connects impartiality to the right to good administration as in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. It includes jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights as well as the approach of the EU Ombudsman and EASO in its scope. These sources provide more concrete aspects of impartiality. The article is finalized with recommendations for a code of conduct.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

Guild, Elspeth, Kathryn Allinson, and Nicolette Busuttil. "The UN Global Compacts and the Common European Asylum System: Coherence or Friction?" Laws 11, no. 2 (April 12, 2022): 35. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/laws11020035.

Full text

Abstract:

This paper examines the “protective potential” of the Global Compacts on Refugees and Migrants vis à vis existing commitments to fundamental rights within the European Union (EU). The relationship between the two normative frameworks is scrutinised to establish the extent to which the two might be mutually supportive or contradictory, since this determines the Compacts’ capacity to inform the interpretation of EU fundamental rights within the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). This paper explores this protective potential through three of the Compacts’ key guiding principles: respect for human rights and the rule of law, the principle of non-regression, and the principle of non-discrimination. The Compacts’ commitments to the first two are presented as sites of coherence where the Compacts concretely express pre-existing protections within EU law and provide a blueprint for implementation in the migration sphere. However, the Compacts’ principle of non-discrimination reveals an area of friction with EU primary law. It is argued that the implementation of this principle can address the inherently discriminatory system underpinning EU law. Within the EU, rather than undermining international and national human rights obligations, the Compacts present an opportunity to refine the implementation of existing EU fundamental rights obligations applicable to migrants and refugees.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Raicevic, Nebojsa. "Building the common European asylum system and its adjustment to mass refugee flows." Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta, Nis, no. 71 (2015): 13–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.5937/zrpfni1571013r.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Lavenex, Sandra. "‘Failing Forward’ Towards Which Europe? Organized Hypocrisy in the Common European Asylum System." JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 56, no. 5 (May 18, 2018): 1195–212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12739.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Myl, Małgorzata. "What might be the future migration and asylum policy of the European Union? Comment on the judgement of the Court of Justice, case C-808/18 European Commission v Hungary." Polish Review of International and European Law 11, no. 1 (June 30, 2022): 151–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.21697/2022.11.1.06.

Full text

Abstract:

In December 2020, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice delivered a judgement in European Commission v. Hungary case which is significant in many respects. The CJEU has confirmed that Hungary had failed to fulfil its obligations in providing migrants with international protection and returning illegally staying third-country nationals. The judgement is also of crucial importance in view of the Common European Asylum System and New Pact on Migration and Asylum. The comment aims at presenting possible consequences of the judgement for both the Hungarian administration and, most importantly, future instruments in the area of asylum in the EU.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Tsourdi, Evangelia (Lilian). "Holding the European Asylum Support Office Accountable for its role in Asylum Decision-Making: Mission Impossible?" German Law Journal 21, no. 3 (April 2020): 506–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/glj.2020.21.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe Common European Asylum System (CEAS) seeks to harmonize national asylum procedures. The initial implementation design of the CEAS, reflective of the theory of executive federalism, foresaw that national authorities were to conduct asylum processing and implement the harmonized norms. The implementation design of the EU asylum policy has, nevertheless, started to shift. An integrated European administration is emerging. One area this is pronounced in is asylum decision-making, where patterns of joint implementation have surfaced. This term broadly refers to staff and experts deployed by the European Asylum Support Office (EASO), an EU agency, working alongside national administrators, including on the processing of asylum claims. This Article scrutinizes the emergence of joint implementation patterns in EU asylum policy and the resulting accountability challenge, drawing both from legal analysis and political science theories. I also refer to administrative practice as documented in secondary sources. EASO is currently subject to a mosaic of accountability processes. Two main pitfalls emerge: the intricate balance between accountability and independence; and accessibility for the individual. Against this backdrop, I focus on extra-judicial accountability through the European Ombudsman which, combined with the envisaged internal “individual complaints mechanism” within EASO, could go some way in ensuring applicants’ procedural rights.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Ippolito, Francesca. "The Contribution of the European Courts to the Common European Asylum System and its Ongoing Recast Process." Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law 20, no. 2 (June 2013): 261–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1023263x1302000207.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Fletcher, Maria. "EU Governance Techniques in the Creation of a Common European Policy on Immigration and Asylum." European Public Law 9, Issue 4 (December 1, 2003): 533–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/euro2003041.

Full text

Abstract:

While the Treaty of Amsterdam succeeded in bringing immigration and asylum policy within the Community domain, it could not shake off some of the intergovernmental bad habits of its past. Title IV EC, described as a 'ghetto' in the EC Treaty, sidelines parliamentary involvement in decision-making, allows for the shared initiation of proposals by Member States and the Commission and limits judicial control by the Court of Justice. Moreover, the accommodation of diverse Member State interests through various opt-in/opt-out deals and the participation of non-EC states in the Schengen system have resulted in unprecedented levels of fragmentation and complexity in the field of immigration and asylum. Yet despite these institutional drawbacks it cannot be denied that the issues of immigration and asylum, for one reason or another, are now firmly established high on the Community's political and legislative agenda. Taking these realities - the complex, sensitive and 'en vogue' nature of this policy domain - as a starting point, this paper explores the means by which the Community has sought to develop and implement its immigration and asylum policy. Recent and ongoing debates about European governance provide the backdrop for a discussion of the nature and appropriateness of governance tools and instruments that have emerged in these related fields. While the broad combination of approaches appears eminently sensible at the moment, it is argued that careful attention must be given to how the Community is to accommodate further, inevitable, diversity in the future.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Moreno-Lax, Violeta. "Dismantling the Dublin System: M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece." European Journal of Migration and Law 14, no. 1 (2012): 1–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157181612x627652.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The Dublin Regulation establishes criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for asylum lodged in the European Union by a third-country national. The system is based on the presumption that Member States may be considered ‘safe countries’ for asylum seekers, for which reason transfers from one Member State to another are supposed not to violate the principle of non-refoulement. The fact that all Member States have acceded to the 1951 Refugee Convention and to the European Convention on Human Rights, that they share a pledge to establish a Common European Asylum System comprising harmonized protection standards, and that, as members of the Union, are obliged to respect and protect fundamental rights, constitute the unspoken premises on which the supposition rests. However, the Dublin Regulation does not establish whether the presumption should be considered absolute or rebuttable, and how and when, in the latter situation, it should be deemed refuted in the individual case. How the ‘principle of refutability’ has come into being in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights constitutes the focus of the present analysis. The review of the Strasbourg jurisprudence is accompanied by an assessment of the diverging practices that have proliferated across the EU in this regard. The paper concludes with some reflections on the impact of the M.S.S. judgement on the forthcoming reform of the Dublin system.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

Cornelisse, Galina, and Marcelle Reneman. "Border Procedures in the European Union: How the Pact Ignored the Compacts." Laws 11, no. 3 (April 22, 2022): 38. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/laws11030038.

Full text

Abstract:

This article analyses the (potential) role of the Global Compact for Migration and the Global Compact for Refugees in the development of EU law concerning asylum seekers who arrive at the external borders of the European Union (EU). Under the current rules, many asylum seekers are refused entry to the territory of the EU and detained while their asylum claim is examined in a border procedure. Some EU Member States even push back asylum seekers without a proper assessment of their needs for international protection. Despite widespread violations of the fundamental rights of asylum seekers at the external borders of the EU, the New Pact on Migration and Asylum presents the new integrated border procedure as an important instrument to ‘deal with mixed flows’ and make the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) work. However, the EU legislator has not substantiated the claim that border procedures will contribute to achieving the aims of the CEAS, such as the creation of a uniform, fair and efficient asylum procedure and prevention of abuse. Neither does the Pact provide a solution for pushbacks and systematic use of detention, nor does it guarantee the quality of the asylum procedure, including the identification of persons with special needs. The Pact therefore not only fails to comply with the EU’s own Better Regulation guidelines and protect the fundamental rights of asylum seekers, but it also ignores the standards of the Global Compacts. What role can the Global Compacts still play in the ongoing negotiations over the Pact?

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Karageorgiou, Eleni. "Solidarity and sharing in the Common European Asylum System: the case of Syrian refugees." European Politics and Society 17, no. 2 (January 8, 2016): 196–214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23745118.2016.1121007.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Journal articles on the topic 'Common European Asylum System'

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles