scholarly journals Language and Knowledge Tests for Permanent Residence Rights: Help or Hindrance for Integration?

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anita Böcker ◽  
Tineke Strik*

AbstractMore and more Member States require immigrants from outside the EU to pass language or knowledge-of-society tests in different stages of the immigration and integration process. This article focuses on the application of this requirement as a condition for obtaining a permanent residence permit or the EU long-term resident status. It is based on an international comparative study that included seven Member States with integration conditions (Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Latvia, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom). The article analyses the reasons behind the introduction of language and knowledge tests for applicants for a permanent residence permit or the EU long-term resident status in these Member States. Secondly, it examines the effects of the tests on the integration process of third-country nationals admitted for non-temporary stay. Finally, it discusses the legal constraints posed by EU and international law.

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kees Groenendijk

AbstractSeveral States require immigrants from outside the EU to participate in language or integration courses after arrival. In recent years, some EU Member States made passing a language test (Netherlands and Germany) or participating in a language course (France) a condition for a visa for family reunification for immigrants from certain third countries. Denmark and the UK introduced a similar requirement in 2010. The focus of his article is on three aspects: the political debate, the legal constraints and the effects. Firstly, the development of the pre-departure integration strategies is analyzed. What was the rationale behind the introduction and does is vary between Member States? Secondly, the legal constraints of EU and international law are discussed. Finally, the results of the first studies evaluating this policy instrument are presented. Is pre-departure a good predictor for immigrant’s ability to integrate? Does it actually assist integration, and what are the unexpected or counterproductive effects?


Author(s):  
Federico Fabbrini

This book examines how the European Union has changed during Brexit and because of Brexit, while also reflecting on the developments of the EU besides Brexit and beyond Brexit. It argues that the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU—the first ever case of disintegration since the start of the European integration process—creates an urgent need to reform the EU. In fact, while the EU institutions and its Member States have remained united in their negotiations vis-à-vis the UK, Brexit has created transitional problems for the EU, and exposed other serious fissures in its system of governance which need to be addressed moving forward. As the EU goes through another major crisis in the form of the response to the Covid-19 pandemic, the case for increasing the effectiveness and the legitimacy of the EU grows stronger. In this context, the book analyses the plan to establish a Conference on the Future of Europe, considering its precedents and discussing its prospects.


2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (4 (1)) ◽  
pp. 39-54
Author(s):  
Robert Grzeszczak

The issue of re-nationalization (disintegration and fragmentation) of integration process is manifested by the will of some of the Member States to verify their relations with the European Union. In the age of an economic crisis of the EU and in relation to the large migration of the population, there has emerged strong social and political criticism, on the European level, of the integration process, with some Member States even consideringtheir withdrawal from the EU. In those States, demands forextending the Member States’ competences in the field of some EU policies are becoming more and more popular. The legal effects of the above-mentioned processes are visible in the free movements of the internal market, mainly within the free movement of persons. Therefore, there are problems, such as increased social dumping process, the need to retain the output of the European labour law, the issue of the so-called social tourism, erosion of the meaning of the EU citizenship and the principle of equal treatment.


Author(s):  
Юрий Юмашев ◽  
Yuriy Yumashev ◽  
Елена Постникова ◽  
Elena Postnikova

The article deals with international law aspects of the GCL. To this aim firstly the international conventions on copyright law are analyzed, in particular: the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works in the wording of the Paris Act of 1971, the Convention on the Establishment of the World Intellectual Property Organization of 1967, the Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organizations of 1961 and Aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPS) 1994. There is also an analysis of the EU copyright law in terms of its correlation with the law of the EU member-states and an assessment of its evolution. It is emphasized that the core fact of origin of authorship is determined on the basis of the national legislation of the Member-States. Special attention is paid to the scope of the “principle of exhausted rights”. The article also touches upon the aspect of private international law. Particular attention is paid to the legal regulation of the Internet, including Internet providers, and its impact on the formation of the GCL. The problem of combating Internet piracy is also raised, as copyright infringement often occurs in relation to works published online. In addition, the article revealed what changes were made to the GCL to comply with EU law (including secondary law acts and the practice of the EU Court). The result of the study is, among other things, the conclusion that special legal mechanisms should be developed to regulate new forms of selling works that have emerged as a result of technological progress and in the near future the Internet will undoubtedly form ways for the further development of the GCL. However, this process can negatively affect the leading role of the author as a creative person.


Author(s):  
Olha Ovechkina

In connection with the decision to withdraw the UK from the EU a number of companies will need to take into account that from 1 January 2021 EU law will no longer apply to the United Kingdom and will become a "third country" for EU Member States, unless the provisions of bilateral agreements or multilateral trade agreements. This means that the four European freedoms (movement of goods, services, labor and capital) will no longer apply to UK companies to the same extent as they did during the UK's EU membership. The purpose of the article is to study, first of all, the peculiarities of the influence of Great Britain's withdrawal from the European Union on the legal regulation of the status of European legal entities. Brexit results in the inability to register European companies and European economic interest groups in the UK. Such companies already registered before 01.01.2021 have the opportunity to move their place of registration to an EU Member State. These provisions are defined in Regulations 2018 (2018/1298) and Regulations 2018 (2018/1299).British companies with branches in EU Member States will now be subject to the rules applicable to third-country companies, which provide additional information on their activities. In the EU, many countries apply the criterion of actual location, which causes, among other things, the problem of non-recognition of legal entities established in the country where the criterion of incorporation is used (including the United Kingdom), at the same time as the governing bodies of such legal entities the state where the settlement criterion is applied. Therefore, to reduce the likelihood of possible non-recognition of British companies, given the location of the board of such a legal entity in the state where the residency criterion applies, it seems appropriate to consider reincarnation at the actual location of such a company. Reducing the risks of these negative consequences in connection with Brexit on cross-border activities of legal entities is possible by concluding interstate bilateral and multilateral agreements that would contain unified rules on conflict of law regulation of the status of legal entities.


2019 ◽  
pp. 121-150
Author(s):  
Ċetta Mainwaring

The fifth chapter analyses how in the EU context Malta constructed a crisis around the issue of migration, and how the small state exploited the crisis to secure more EU funds and support. It thus focuses on how member states on the periphery respond to the new responsibility they face as EU migration gatekeepers. In this way, the chapter continues to explore the theme of power at the margins but moves away from the migrant experience to that of a small state at the edge of Europe. The chapter analyses Malta’s strategies at the EU level and its lobbying around particular policies between 2008 and 2016, including (1) the European Pact on Immigration and Asylum, (2) the Schengen Borders Code, (3) the Dublin Regulation, and (4) the Long-Term Residents Directive. The research demonstrates how Malta exerted an unexpected level of influence on EU migration governance by adopting a number of strategies, including emphasizing its small state status, its gatekeeper role, and the ‘crisis’. The most significant success was the expansion of the concept of solidarity within the EU to not only include financial transfers but also the relocation of people. However, this success has come at a price: Malta’s construction and exploitation of a migration crisis reinforces the very emphasis on migration control at the external border that it has resisted. Indeed, the EU framework now shapes Malta’s interests and strategies, encouraging the construction of migration crisis in the Mediterranean and the reduction of migrants to symbols of suffering and disorder.


Author(s):  
Angelo Marletta

The European Union (EU), as unprecedented institutional and polity project, is responsible for the fulfilment of a set of policy goals that go beyond the mere sum of the interests of its Member States. The establishment of an ‘area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, in which the free movement of persons is ensured in conjunction with appropriate measures with respect to . . . the prevention and combating of crime’ is probably one of the most demanding goals of the integration process, whose fulfilment requires commitment to coherent action on several levels: vertically, between the EU and the Member States, through incorporating the implementation of the Treaty objectives in the development of their respective criminal policies, and horizontally, between the Member States themselves, by developing mutual trust.


Author(s):  
Anand Menon ◽  
Luigi Scazzieri

This chapter examines the history of the United Kingdom’s relationship with the European integration process. The chapter dissects the long-term trends in public opinion and the more contingent, short-term factors that led to the referendum vote to leave the European Union. The UK was a late joiner and therefore unable to shape the early institutional development of the EEC. British political parties and public opinion were always ambiguous about membership and increasingly Eurosceptic from the early 1990s. Yet the UK had a significant impact on the EU’s development, in the development of the single market programme and eastward enlargement. If Brexit goes through, Britain will nevertheless maintain relations with the EU in all policy areas from agriculture to energy and foreign policy. Europeanization will remain a useful theoretical tool to analyse EU–UK relations even if the UK leaves the Union.


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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document