Between Persecution and Protection: Refugees and the New European Asylum Policy

2000 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 169-197
Author(s):  
Elspeth Guild
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Asylum Policy ◽  
Minimum Standards ◽  
Amsterdam Treaty ◽  
European Court ◽  
Common Policies ◽  
The Right

The admission, reception and treatment of asylum seekers in the European Union has been an issue of continuing political and legal concern throughout the 1990’s. The rising numbers of persons seeking protection at the beginning of the period coupled with a rapidly developing regional jurisprudence on the right to protection from the European Court of Human Rights in particular, changed the nature of the debate. The Member States began to search for common policies and practices as regards asylum through intergovernmental measures. With the Amsterdam Treaty, the most important aspects of asylum have been transferred to the EC Treaty: criteria and mechanisms for determining which Member State is responsible for considering an application for asylum; minimum standards on reception of asylum seekers; minimum standards with respect to the qualification of nationals of third countries as refugees; minimum standards on procedures for granting and withdrawing refugee status amongst others.

Between Persecution and Protection: Refugees and the New European Asylum Policy

2000 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 169-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elspeth Guild
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Asylum Policy ◽  
Minimum Standards ◽  
Amsterdam Treaty ◽  
European Court ◽  
Common Policies ◽  
The Right

The admission, reception and treatment of asylum seekers in the European Union has been an issue of continuing political and legal concern throughout the 1990’s. The rising numbers of persons seeking protection at the beginning of the period coupled with a rapidly developing regional jurisprudence on the right to protection from the European Court of Human Rights in particular, changed the nature of the debate. The Member States began to search for common policies and practices as regards asylum through intergovernmental measures. With the Amsterdam Treaty, the most important aspects of asylum have been transferred to the EC Treaty: criteria and mechanisms for determining which Member State is responsible for considering an application for asylum; minimum standards on reception of asylum seekers; minimum standards with respect to the qualification of nationals of third countries as refugees; minimum standards on procedures for granting and withdrawing refugee status amongst others.

Harmonisation of Asylum Law and Policy within the European Union: A Human Rights Perspective

2002 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-184
Author(s):  
Hannah R. Garry
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Asylum Policy ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
Amsterdam Treaty ◽  
Asylum Law ◽  
The Eu

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.

La spinta verso una legislazione europea comune sul diritto di conoscere le proprie origini genetiche / The push towards common European legislation with respect to the right to know one’s genetic origins

2018 ◽  
Vol 66 (6) ◽  
pp. 747-761
Author(s):  
Gianluca Montanari Vergallo ◽  
Natale Mario Di Luca
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Right To Know ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Legislation ◽  
Anonymous Birth ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right To Know ◽  
Genetic Origins ◽  
The Right

A venti anni dalla sua approvazione, la Convenzione di Oviedo necessita di un aggiornamento. Infatti, non affronta la questione del diritto dei bambini nati da fecondazione eterologa di conoscere l’identità dei donatori di gameti. La Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo ha recentemente stabilito che: a) il diritto di conoscere le proprie origini biologiche è tutelato dall’art. 8 della Convenzione dei diritti dell’uomo; b) tale diritto deve essere bilanciato con quello della madre biologica di rimanere anonima (c.d. parto anonimo). Al fine di trovare tale bilanciamento, una possibile soluzione consiste nel richiedere ai giudici di convocare la madre per chiederle se intende revocare l’anonimato. Se la madre ribadisce la propria originaria intenzione di rimanere sconosciuta, il Tribunale non può consentire al figlio di conoscere la sua identità. Gli autori analizzano anche altre due questioni non prese in considerazione dalla Corte europea: a) l’equilibrio tra il diritto di conoscere le proprie origini e quello dei donator di gamete all’anonimato; b) se tale diritto dei bambini nati da fecondazione eterologa vincoli i genitori legali a rivelargli le modalità del concepimento. Tali problemi e l’importanza degli interessi in gioco inducono gli autori a sostenere che la scelta di usare il citato art. 8 come criterio di giudizio non è affatto ottimale. Appare preferibile affrontare queste questioni attraverso un aggiornamento della Convenzione di Oviedo o comunque con modalità tali da arrivare ad una regolamentazione che sia uniforme all’interno dell’Unione europea. ---------- Twenty years since it was opened for signature, the Oviedo Convention needs updating. It does not deal with the issue of the donor-conceived children’s right to know the identity of the gamete donors. The European Court of Human Rights has recently stated that: a) the right to know one’s biological background is protected by article 8 of the Convention on Human Rights; b) such a right must be balanced with the biological mother’s right to anonymity (anonymous birth). In order to find such balancing, a possible solution might be to require judges to summon mothers to ask them whether they would like to reverse their decision to be anonymous. If the mother reaffirms her intention to remain unknown, the court may not allow the child to learn of her identity and contact her. The authors also analyze two other issues not taken into account by the European Court: a) the balancing between the right to know one’s origins and the gamete donors’ right to anonymity; b) whether the donor-conceived children’s right to know would make it mandatory for legal parents to disclose conception procedures. These problems and the importance of the interests at stake induce the authors to argue that the choice to keep using the above mentioned article 8 as yardstick is far from ideal. It appears to be far preferable to deal with these issues while updating the Oviedo Convention or in such a way as to incentivize the enactment of legislation that would be uniform throughout the European Union.

THE PROTECTION OF EUROPEAN UNION CITIZENS VICTIMS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING IN EUROPE

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 159-178
Author(s):  
Fulvia Staiano
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Trafficking ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
European Court ◽  
Common European Asylum System

On February 2015, Eurostat issued a report highlighting that 65% of registered victims of human trafficking in Europe between 2010 and 2012 were citizens of the European Union (EU). Despite the seriousness of this phenomenon, EU citizens who are victims of trafficking are afforded little protection in the European legal space. First, the multi-level legal framework against trafficking applicable on the Union territory does not recognise clear residence rights to this group. Second, the general freedom of movement granted to all EU citizens under Directive 2004/38 might be precluded to victims of trafficking due to the economic prerequisites required by this instrument. It follows that the granting of refugee status to EU citizens who are victims of trafficking becomes a crucial source of protection. The safe country presumption in force between EU Member States under the so-called Aznar Protocol, however, precludes access to international protection for this group. This article critically reviews the Common European Asylum System, in search of normative and judicial interpretations capable of ensuring a stronger protection of EU citizens who are victims of trafficking. In this context, a special focus is devoted to the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Some decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of the European Union con cerning the right of asylum

10.12737/5251 ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-74
Author(s):  
Габриэлла Белова ◽  
Gabriela Belova ◽  
Мария Хаджипетрова-Лачова ◽  
Maria Hadzhipetrova-Lachova
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Protective Mechanisms ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The authors analyze certain cases considered in recent years by the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of European Union in Luxembourg and associated with providing of asylum to the third country nationals. In individual EU member states there are huge differences in the procedures and protective mechanisms for asylum seekers in their access to work, as well as in the use of mechanism of forced detention. Due to accession of the EU to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the EU should comply the standards set by the Council of Europe. The authors analyze the new approach of the Strasbourg Court in decision MSS v. Belgium and Greece unlike other "Dublin" cases. They also consider certain new judgements of the Court of European Union in Luxembourg, some of which were accepted in order of urgent prejudicial production.

scholarly journals Victim Participation in the Criminal Justice System in the European Union through Private Prosecutions: Issues Emerging from the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 107-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Countries ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

Private prosecutions are one of the ways through which crime victims in many European countries participate in the criminal justice system. However, there seems to be a reluctance at the Council of Europe level to strengthen a victim’s right to institute a private prosecution. In a 1985 Recommendation, the Committee of Ministers stated that ‘[t]he victim should have the right to ask for a review by a competent authority of a decision not to prosecute, or the right to institute private proceeding.’ Later in 2000 in the Recommendation Rec (2000)19 on the role of public prosecution in the criminal justice system, the Committee of Ministers calls upon Member States to ‘authorise’ victims to institute private prosecutions. Directive 2012/29/eu of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 is silent on private prosecutions. The dg Justice Guidance Document related to the transposition and implementation of Directive 2012/29/eu of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 discourages private prosecutions. However, private prosecutions take part in many European countries. It is thus important to highlight some of the issues that have emerged from different European countries on the issue of private prosecutions. Case law from the European Court of Human Rights shows that private prosecutions take place in many European countries. This article, based on case law of the European Court of Human Rights, highlights the following issues with regards to private prosecutions: the right to institute a private prosecution; who may institute a private prosecution? private prosecution after state declines to prosecute; state intervention in a private prosecution; and private prosecution as a domestic remedy which has to be exhausted before a victim of crime approaches the European Court of Human Rights. The author argues that there is a need to recognise the right to private prosecution at the European Union level.

scholarly journals O Papel do Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia Como Guardião do Direito Fundamental Comunitário Europeu à Livre Circulação de Trabalhadores

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (13) ◽  
pp. 469-480
Author(s):  
Alexandre Coutinho Pagliarini ◽  
Maria Fernanda Augustinhak Schumacker Haering Teixeira
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Free Movement Of Workers ◽  
The Right ◽  
Economic Bloc ◽  
The Guardian ◽  
Second World

This research has as general objective to analyze the guardian role exercised by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJUE) for the protection of the Fundamental Community Right to the free movement of workers within the scope of the European economic bloc and the importance of the migratory flow for the maintenance of the said block. The spouse of this article previously analyzes the emergence of the European Communities and the need for the defense, reconstruction and stabilization of Europe after the end of the Second World War, as well as dealing with the Treaties of Paris and Rome, propellants of the European Communities, characterized as an autonomous legal system and of great importance for the development of European primary law. Then, he discusses the movement of workers within the European Union (EU) and the right of the European citizen to look for a job, to work, to settle or to provide services in any EU Member State, and then to address the issue of the role of the worker. CJEU as guardian of the fundamental European Community law on the free movement of workers. After the analysis of recent judgments of the European Court of Justice, the need to protect the free movement of European workers, with due regard to the founding treaties of the European Union, remains necessary for the proper maintenance of the European bloc European Union. The methodology used in the research is critical reflexive, which operates through the bibliographic review and the analysis of concrete cases assessed by the CJEU.

scholarly journals Algorytm jako informacja publiczna w prawie europejskim

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Mazur
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Access Information ◽  
The Right ◽  
Automated Decision Making

The author verifies the hypothesis concerning the possibility of using algorithms – applied in automated decision making in public sector – as information which is subject to the law governing the right to access information or the right to access official documents in European law. She discusses problems caused by the approach to these laws in the European Union, as well as lack of conformity of the jurisprudence between the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights.

The Catch-22 of Asylum Policy

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
David Scott FitzGerald
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Remote Control ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Asylum Policy ◽  
Global North ◽  
Catch 22 ◽  
The Rich

Most refugees do not have a legal way of reaching safety in the rich democracies of the Global North. There is no legal line where they can register and wait as their number advances. Obtaining a resettlement slot is like winning the lottery. The only realistic way to reach the Global North is to reach its territory and then ask for asylum. Rich democracies typically abide by the principle of non-refoulement but deliberately and systematically shut down most legal paths to safety. An architecture of repulsion based on cages, domes, buffers, moats, and barbicans keeps out asylum seekers and other migrants. Australia, Canada, the United States, and the European Union have converging policies of remote control to keep asylum seekers away from their territories. The catch-22 for refugees is that rich democracies are essentially telling them, “We will not kick you out if you come here. But we will not let you come here.”

Norwegian Asylum Policy and Response to the 2015 Refugee Crisis

2020 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 391-406
Author(s):  
Sumbul Parveen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Political Discourse ◽  
Total Population ◽  
Civil Society Organizations ◽  
Refugee Crisis ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Asylum Policy

In recent years, Norway has emerged as an important destination of asylum for refugees. During the refugee crisis of 2015, Norway, with a total population of slightly above 5 million, received more than 31,000 applications for asylum. This was close to the total number of asylum seekers it had received in the last three years. This article discusses Norway’s history as an asylum destination as well as policies for the protection and integration of refugees. It focuses on how the refugee crisis of 2015 unfolded in Norway. The domestic political discourse and the response of civil society organizations are analysed. The article also looks at the changes introduced in the asylum policy and the role of the European Union in determining Norway’s response to the crisis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document