scholarly journals Rules Over Rights? Legal Aspects of the European Commission Recommendation for Resumption of Dublin Transfers of Asylum Seekers to Greece

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (05) ◽  
pp. 637-659
Author(s):  
Boryana Gotsova
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Commission Recommendation ◽  
Area Rule ◽  
Asylum Procedure

AbstractFive years after the Dublin transfers of asylum seekers to Greece were halted—due to recurrent failings in the detention conditions, living conditions, and asylum procedure—the European Commission recommended a resumption of the practice. This Article analyzes the Recommendation in light of the human rights reports preceding and following it. The examination reveals that the renewal of systematic transfers would be premature, posing serious risks to the rights of asylum seekers under European and EU law. The restoration of a flawed system for distribution of asylum claims among the Member States—without fundamental reforms towards greater solidarity—may lead to a repetition of past mistakes. Despite the paramount importance of the Dublin system for the functioning of the Schengen Area, rule enforcement should not supersede human rights protection.

Out of Sight, Out of Mind: Post-return Monitoring – A Missing Link in the International Protection of Refugees?

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 363-386
Author(s):  
Jari Pirjola
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Missing Link ◽  
Return Policies ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Irregular Migrants ◽  
Refugees And Asylum Seekers

Abstract Post-return monitoring of rejected asylum-seekers is the missing link in the protection chain for rejected asylum-seekers. In the European Union, for example, the rights of rejected asylum-seekers are well guaranteed and monitored in the pre-return and return phases. Systematic monitoring of forced returns stops when the deportee arrives at the airport of his or her country of origin. The sending countries do not know what happens to rejected asylum-seekers and irregular migrants upon return. International human rights organisations have started to pay attention to this gap in the international protection system. Ignorance by States in this regard deprives them of important insights from the viewpoint of human rights protection and return policies. This article explores what comprises post-return monitoring, what kinds of post-return monitoring projects have been carried out so far and how post-return monitoring could be implemented in the future. The article also discusses the role of post-return monitoring in the refugee determination procedure. It is argued that post-return monitoring could both strengthen the protection of refugees and asylum-seekers and assist States in creating effective, transparent, and morally responsible return policies.

“Not Taking Rights Seriously”. Opting for the Primacy of eu Law over Broader Human Rights Protection

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-302
Author(s):  
Fisnik Korenica ◽  
Dren Doli
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Relationship

The European Union (eu) accession to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (echr) has been a hot topic in the European legal discourse in this decade. Ruling on the compliance of the Draft Agreement on eu accession to the echr with the eu Treaties, the Court of Justice of the eu (cjeu) came up with a rather controversial Opinion. It ruled that the Draft Agreement is incompliant with the eu Treaties in several respects. One of the core concerns in Opinion 2/13 relates to the management of horizontal relationship between the eu Charter of Fundamental Rights (ChFR) and echr, namely Article 53 ChFR and Article 53 echr. The article examines the Opinion 2/13’s specific concerns on the relationship between Article 53 ChFR and Article 53 echr from a post-accession perspective. It starts by considering the question of the two 53s’ relationship from the eu-law autonomy viewpoint, indicating the main gaps that may present a danger to the latter. While questioning from a number of perspectives the plausibility of the cjeu’s arguments in relation to the two 53s, the article argues that the Court was both controversial and argued against itself when it drew harshly upon these concerns. The article also presents three options to address the cjeu’s requirements on this issue. The article concludes that the cjeu’s statements on the two 53s will seriously hurt the accession project, while critically limiting the possibility of Member States to provide broader protection.

9. Human rights in the EU

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elspeth Berry ◽  
Matthew J. Homewood ◽  
Barbara Bogusz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
History Of ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Explanatory Text ◽  
The Eu

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter begins with a brief history of human rights protection in Europe, including the separate role of the Council of Europe and the ECHR, as well as that of the EU and EU law. It then discusses the development of human rights protection by the EU; the need for human rights protection against the EU and its Member States; the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU; the enforcement of human rights in EU law; and the possibility of EU accession to the ECHR.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document