Beyond EU Borders, Beyond EU Responsibility: The Protection of Asylum-Seekers’ Rights In and Outside the EU. Reflections on the X. & X. and Al Chodor Cases

Author(s):  
Sara De Vido
Keyword(s):  
2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ibrahim Sirkeci

Doğu ve güney komşuları üzerinde gelen göç akınlarının ve üye ülkeler arasındaki göçlerin artışıyla Avrupa Birliği (AB) en büyük krizlerinden birini yaşamaktadır. Avrupa’daki en ana tartışma konuları arasında Avrupa’ya göçü ve AB içindeki göçü sınırlamak ve üye ülkeler arasında mülteci kotası ve külfet paylaşımına yapılan itirazlar yer aldı. Bu krizde Türkiye anahtar ülke olarak ortaya çıktı ve ülkedeki büyük Suriyeli mülteci nüfusu ve bu nüfusun Avrupa’ya gitmesini engellemesi karşılığında vaat edilen milyarlarca Avro nedeniyle tartışmaların odağında yer aldı. Suriye krizi 4,8 milyon mülteci yarattı ve 2016 yılı sonu itibariyle bunların 2,8 milyonu Türkiye’de ikamet etmekteydi. Suriyeli mültecilere karşı cömert tavrıyla Türkiye güvenli bir ülke olarak tescil edilmiş oldu. Bu, hikayenin daha karanlık bir başka yüzünü gölgelemektedir. Çünkü aynı ülkenin vatandaşları 1980 askeri darbesinden bu yana milyonu aşkın sığınma başvurusu yaptılar. Ülkenin bugünkü şartları ve yeni veriler, Türkiye’den AB’ye yönelen daha çok mülteci akını olacağını gösteriyor. ABSTRACT IN ENGLISHTurkey’s refugees, Syrians and refugees from Turkey: a country of insecurityThe European Union (EU) has faced one of its biggest crises with the rise of population inflows through its Eastern and Southern neighbours as well as movements within the Union. In 2016, the main debate that dominated Europe was on restricting migration within and into the EU along with concerns and objections to the refugee quota systems and the sharing of the burden among member states. Turkey emerged as a ‘gate keeper’ in this crisis and has since been at the centre of debates because of the large Syrian refugee population in the country and billions of Euros it was promised to prevent refugees travelling to Europe. The Syrian crisis produced over 4.8 million refugees with over 2.8 million were based in Turkey by the end of 2016. Turkey with its generous support for Syrian refugees has been confirmed as a ‘country of security’. This shadows the darker side of affairs as the very same country has also produced millions of asylum seekers since the 1980 military coup. Current circumstances and fresh evidence indicate that there will be more EU bound refugees coming through and from Turkey. 


Author(s):  
Fatih Resul Kılınç ◽  
Şule Toktaş

This article addresses the international movement of asylum seekers and refugees, particularly Syrian immigrants, and their impact on populism in Turkish politics between 2011 and 2018. The article argues that populist politics/rhetoric directed against Syrians in Turkey remained limited during this period, especially from a comparative perspective. At a time when rising Islamophobia, extreme nationalism, and anti-immigrant sentiments led to rise of right-wing populism in Europe, populist platforms exploiting specifically migrants, asylum seekers, and the Syrians in Turkey failed to achieve a similar effect. The chapter identifies two reasons for this puzzling development even as the outbreak of the Syrian civil war triggered a mass influx of asylum seekers and irregular immigrants into Turkey. First, the article focuses on Turkey’s refugee deal with the EU in response to “Europe’s refugee crisis,” through which Turkey has extracted political and economic leverage. Next, the article sheds light on Turkey’s foreign policy making instruments that evolved around using the refugee situation as an instrument of soft power pursuant to its foreign policy identity. The article concludes with a discussion of the rise of anti-Syrian sentiments by 2019.


2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 923-948 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anuscheh Farahat ◽  
Nora Markard

The European Union (EU) Member States have experienced the recent refugee protection crisis in the EU as a de-facto loss of control over their borders. They find themselves unable to subject entry into their territory to a sovereign decision. In response, the Member States have sought to regain full sovereignty over matters of forced migration, both unilaterally and cooperatively, seeking to govern a phenomenon—forced migration—that by definition defies governance. Unilateral measures include forced migration caps and a search for ways to circumvent responsibility under the Dublin system. Cooperative efforts by EU Member States include the search for ways to more effectively govern forced migration at the EU level and beyond. Supranational EU efforts include the introduction of an internal relocation scheme and support for Italy and Greece in processing asylum claims in so-called “hotspots.” Beyond the EU, Member States are seeking to externalize protection responsibility to third world countries under international agreements, in particular, by returning asylum seekers to Turkey. This Article outlines the unilateral and cooperative governance efforts undertaken and shows that states' sovereign decisions over migration are significantly limited in the case of forced migrants, both by EU law and by international law.


2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Trauner ◽  
Emanuele Manigrassi

Abstract In the wake of the visa liberalisation for Western Balkan states, the sudden increase of Balkan asylum seekers has become a salient issue in the eu. This article elaborates on how this issue has made the eu alter its instruments of visa-free travel. With regard to the pre-visa liberalisation phase, the eu now places more emphasis on issues relating to the fundamental rights and social inclusion of marginalised groups, in particular Roma. Also, the ongoing Visa Free Dialogues with countries such as Ukraine and Russia have become more political and include more instances of decision-making where member states can slow down the process. The most significant modification to the EU’s approach is probably the fact that the eu has developed a structured post-visa liberalisation phase. With its post-visa liberalisation monitoring and the visa safeguard clause, the EU has established new (lower level) instruments to keep track of and push for further reforms post-visa liberalisation. The incentive of visa-free travel has turned into a moving target not only used as a source of external eu influence on domestic policy-making pre-visa liberalisation but also post-visa liberalisation.


Author(s):  
Etienne Piguet

Abstract This article analyses the recent growth in asylum applications both in and at the borders of Europe. It enriches the scholarship on the so-called ‘refugee crisis’ with an emphasis on structural transformations and geographical processes. While an increase in regional violence near Europe in 2015 played a key role in triggering displacements, we suggest three longer-term factors that may have facilitated access to European borders but led to urgent and often dangerous migratory situations for asylum seekers: the ‘shortening’ of distances, the crisis of containment policies and the geographic asymmetry of rights. On this basis, we interpret the EU policy of closing borders as an attempt to (re)create a geographic buffer separating refugees from their destinations in the context of the globalization of asylum-related issues.


CNS Spectrums ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Emanuele Caroppo ◽  
Pierluigi Lanzotti ◽  
Luigi Janiri

Abstract Background. Literature shows that migrants—a generic definition for persons who leave their own country of origin—have increased psychopathological vulnerability. Between 2014 and 2017, 976 963 non-European Union (non-EU) people arrived in Italy, of which 30% for humanitarian reasons. This study is aimed at a better understanding of the experience of asylum seekers who transferred to Italy were subjected to the EU Dublin Regulation and most of them suspended in their asylum application. Methods. We elaborate a descriptive study based on a population of refugees and asylum seekers who have suffered from social and personal migratory stressful factors. Clinical data was collected between 2011 and 2013 at the “A. Gemelli” General Hospital IRCCS, Rome, Italy. Minors, elderly people, and patients who are unable to declare a voluntary consensus and economic migrants were excluded from the study. Candidates for the status of refugee or asylum seekers were included. Results. The sample consisted of 180 asylum seekers aged 25.52 ± 5.6 years. Most frequently diagnosis was post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (53%), subthreshold PTSD was reported in 22% of subjects. We found phenomenological patterns highly representative of PTSD of the dissociative subtype. Around 20% of the sample suffered from psychotic symptomatology. Conclusions. Loss of the migratory project and the alienation mediated by chronic social defeat paradigm may trigger a psychopathological condition described by the failure to cope with the negative emotional context of social exclusion and solitude. A common and integrated treatment project is needed, with the scope of reintegrating the migrant’s personal and narrative identity.


2002 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-184
Author(s):  
Hannah R. Garry

From 1986 to the present, there has been a dramatic increase in the numbers of asylum applications within the borders of the European Union largely from Eastern European countries and former colonies in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Reacting to the influxes of the 1980s, European States began to implement and coordinate policies to control entry of asylum seekers. Within this climate, the EU has moved towards harmonisation of asylum policy and procedure as necessary for its pursuit of an ‘area of freedom, security and justice’ without internal borders for the purpose of greater economic and political integration. In light of the current restrictive attitudes and practice towards asylum seekers in the individual Member States of the EU, the harmonisation of asylum policy through the institutions and law of the EU may prove to be problematic from a human rights perspective. This paper first traces the development of a common asylum policy within the EU through the Maastricht Treaty and the Amsterdam Treaty. Second, this paper analyses the implications of harmonisation after the Amsterdam Treaty with reference to the international obligations of the Member States under international human rights and refugee law. Third, this paper critiques the development of various current asylum policies and practice through intergovernmental development of ‘soft law’. Through this overview and analysis, it is argued that further steps towards harmonisation will continue to reflect European concerns with security, economic prosperity, and cultural homogeneity unless the moves towards supranationalism within the EU framework lead to a deliberate effort to make respect for human rights the core of asylum law and policy.


Subject EU immigration division. Significance Immigration to Europe has fallen substantially over the past three years, largely because of stricter rules in EU member states and enhanced cooperation with the EU's neighbours. This downward trend, however, coincides with growing tensions between member states over how to tackle immigration once migrants and refugees enter European territory. Impacts Unable to agree on an effect asylum seekers reform, the EU will continue funding African countries to stop irregular migratory flows. Disengagement of EU search and rescue assets and more reliance on under-trained North African coast guards will make sea migration deadlier. Divergent views on immigration burden-sharing could worsen foreign relations between populists in Italy and those in Hungary and Poland.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document