EU or UK Child-Sponsored Family Reunification Policy: Who’s Right? Whose Rights?

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 245-283
Author(s):  
Chris Downes
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Members ◽  
Family Reunification ◽  
Children At Risk ◽  
Unaccompanied Minors ◽  
Eu Policy ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
The Uk

Abstract The increase in numbers of children travelling unaccompanied to Europe has provoked a sensitive debate as to how to treat their family members. While EU Member States generally grant family reunification for unaccompanied minors, the UK has opted to permit reunion in only ‘exceptional circumstances’. Widely criticised, the UK government counters that child-sponsored family reunification creates incentives for unaccompanied migration that place children at risk. This article explores both policies from a human rights perspective. It suggests that, as regards children reaching Europe, EU policy is more consistent with human rights norms. However, UK policy raises legitimate questions about obligations towards children beyond Europe’s borders. A rights-based justification for either EU or UK policy can be constructed, but requires recourse to additional principles on the balancing of rights among different groups of children. Clearer articulation and scrutiny of these principles could strengthen the rights rationale for child-sponsored family reunification.

scholarly journals EU Citizens, Foreign Family Members and European Union Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 358-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elspeth Guild
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Members ◽  
Family Reunification ◽  
Political Agenda ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Family Reunion ◽  
Eu Member States

Abstract While international human rights law enshrines family life as a cornerstone of society, when it intersects with migration, issues and problems arise in countries where migration is high on the political agenda. This is true in a number of EU states. Both EU law and European human rights commitments, however, require states to provide for family reunification subject to a margin of discretion to the state. While family reunification for refugees and beneficiaries of international protection has been at the top of some political agendas in Europe, this article looks at family reunification (generally known as family reunion) for another group—nationals of the Member States. In particular it poses two questions: do EU Member States accept their own nationals to come back to their home state with third country national family members they have acquired while abroad? Secondly, to what extent do EU Member States discriminate against their own nationals in comparison with the generous EU rules of family reunion for nationals of other Member States who have exercised a free movement right in their country. This article is based on reports by experts from all EU Member States in light of the 2014 judgment in O & B (C-456/12) by the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Not So Normative After All: The Securitization of Migration since 9/11 and the Erosion of Normative Power in Europe

1970 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Moscoe
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
Risk Society ◽  
Global Risk ◽  
Traditional Role ◽  
Transnational Terrorism ◽  
Normative Power ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Universal Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Norms

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, accelerated initiatives tocombat terrorism have been criticized for overstepping the bounds of universal human rights norms. A defining feature of European Union (EU) policy as a normative power is how it navigates the customary frictions between human rights and counterterrorism by committing to “combat terrorism globally while respecting human rights, and make Europe safer, allowing its citizens to live in an area of freedom, security and justice.” This paper argues that the threat of transnational terrorism has led Europe to stray from its normative position. This is most clearly understood by examining the securitization of EU interactions with the Mediterranean - particularly North Africa - with regard to migration policy. Migration is considered as “transformed into a key element in the context of transnational threats,” and indeed EU Member States are targeted by Islamist terrorists entering EU soil by way of the Middle East or the Maghreb. Finally, this paper explores how the post-9/11 threat environment - anintensified “global risk society” -has led the EU to downplay its traditional role in ensuring protection of universal human rights through such normative instruments as the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).

scholarly journals Networks, Connectedness and Resilience: Learning From the Children's Fund in Context

2007 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marian Barnes ◽  
Kate Morris
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Social Exclusion ◽  
Children At Risk ◽  
Policy Action ◽  
Policy Initiatives ◽  
The Past ◽  
National Programmes ◽  
Outcomes For Children ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Voluntary Organisations

During the past decade, expectations placed on child welfare services in the UK have moved away from individualised provision geared to meeting the needs of specific children at risk, to consideration of the broader context for children. The introduction of a series of national programmes aimed at addressing social exclusion and tasked with stimulating new approaches to enabling better outcomes for children formed the background for the recent legislation and guidance for local children's services. The Children's Fund was one of a raft of New Labour social policies promoting partnerships between statutory and voluntary organisations in order to address the cross-cutting issue of social exclusion. It was announced following the UK 2000 Spending Review and drew from the Policy Action Team12 (PAT12) Report, ‘Young People at Risk’ (SEU, 2000). Funding started in January 2001 and continues until 2008 with a total allocation during this period of £960 million. Like most special policy initiatives instigated following 1997, the establishment of the Children's Fund was accompanied by both national and local evaluation requirements. The National Evaluation of the Children's Fund (NECF) was undertaken by a team from the Universities of Birmingham and London and this themed section draws on selected findings from that evaluation. Overall results are reported in Edwards et al., (2006).

scholarly journals Prisoner Transfer Within the Irish-UK Common Travel Area (CTA) After Brexit: Human Rights Between Politics and Penal Reform

2020 ◽  
pp. 002201832097752
Author(s):  
Tim J Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Penal Reform ◽  
Long Duration ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Uk Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

The UK Government proposed in February 2020 that sentenced prisoner transfers with EU member states should continue after Brexit, but using a more ‘effective’ process than the existing CoE convention. The article analyses, with a particular focus on the Irish-UK CTA, the significance of continued UK human rights compliance for the achievement of this objective and the interrelationship of this issue with extradition/surrender (including the surrender of fugitive prisoners). It is concluded that Brexit has most probably raised the level of formal and institutional human rights compliance (including legal aid/assistance and the direct enforcement of prisoners’ rights in domestic courts) required from the UK for criminal justice cooperation with EU member states. Entering into such undertakings would not assist criminal impunity or the evasion of lawfully imposed penalties. Such undertakings, however, cannot help to resolve many problems inherent in prisoner transfer within the EU. The creation of a truly effective and rehabilitative transfer system would require (a) constructive UK Government participation in inter-governmental (including the UK devolved governments)/EU arrangements capable of incrementally resolving or effectively mitigating criminal justice cooperation problems and (b) acceptance at Westminster that this aspect of post-Brexit readjustment is likely to be intermittent and of long-duration.

A Local Authority v. AG, DG, and SG, GG & AG

2021 ◽  
Vol 192 ◽  
pp. 659-674
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Diplomatic Relations ◽  
Children At Risk ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity

659Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic immunity — Family of diplomatic agent — Child protection — Children Act 1989 — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, Articles 31, 32 and 37 — Treaty interpretation — Relevance of human rights agreements — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 — Human Rights Act 1998Treaties — Interpretation — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, Articles 31 and 37 — Diplomatic immunity — Exceptions to diplomatic immunity — Whether to read in exception to diplomatic immunity to protect children at riskRelationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Interpretation — Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 — Human Rights Act 1998 — Whether Vienna Convention could be read to include exception to diplomatic immunity to protect children at risk — Role of Parliament — Whether proposed exception violating plain and natural meaning of Vienna Convention — Reciprocity — Principle of diplomatic immunity — The law of England

The UNGPs — Five Years on

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 289-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maddalena Neglia
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Financial Reporting ◽  
Policy Instruments ◽  
Public Regulation ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Business And Human Rights ◽  
Eu Directive ◽  
Modern Slavery ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Uk

The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights were endorsed in 2011 by the UN Human Rights Council. Since then they have become a normative platform and have led to widespread convergence of national and international regulatory initiatives. Focusing on Europe, this articles shows that the consensus reached, in particular on human rights due diligence, has been a driving force behind the influence the Principles have had on public regulation of business and human rights. One example is offered by the EU's approach to integrating UNGPs into legal and policy instruments, including the 2011 Communication on CSR and the EU Directive no. 2014/95 on non-financial reporting. But this has been accompanied by recent developments in EU Member States' public regulation of business and human rights, including the UK Modern Slavery Act and the French bill on ‘devoir de vigilance’. The article concludes that, despite the emergence of a piecemeal regulatory approach, coherence in the public regulation of business violations of human rights is urgently needed in Europe. It further shows that, if properly led, this process could entail reinforcement of the EU's commitment to the UNGPs' implementation.

scholarly journals On the transformation of children at-risk into an investment proposition: A study of Social Impact Bonds as an anti-market device

2017 ◽  
Vol 66 (3) ◽  
pp. 492-510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Neyland
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Science And Technology Studies ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Third Sector ◽  
Children At Risk ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Impact Bonds ◽  
Intractable Problems ◽  
Uk Government ◽  
The Uk

Following the financial crisis of 2008, the UK government accelerated a number of market-based interventions into public problems. Experimenting with new forms of intervention provided a moment to effectively problematize the public sector as a whole and its budgets, opening up for discussion the basis for making an intervention, and the methods and costs involved. Questions were posed of the apparently irreducible costs associated with supposedly intractable problems of government (such as homelessness, vulnerable children or crime). In particular, crisis and austerity became a means to give new momentum to a series of experimental ways to shape the social investment market that had been under discussion in various forms since at least 2000. Social Impact Bonds form one particular type of intervention. They involve drawing together investors with delivery agencies, the third sector and national and local government, coordinated by a commissioner. In the recent move by the UK government to set up and use Social Impact Bonds, much has been made of the opportunity they represent to introduce competition, efficiency, efficacy, private sector thinking and investment to a range of different social problems. As the first results of these experiments are now emerging, this article reports on a study conducted into a market-based intervention that experiments with the transformation of ‘children at-risk’ into an investment proposition through a Social Impact Bond. The article suggests that the Social Impact Bond can be usefully explored by drawing on Science and Technology Studies (STS) treatments of markets as collective, heterogeneous assemblages. However, in contrast to scholars who focus on market devices, the article argues that the Social Impact Bond in practice operates as something akin to an anti-market device. The article begins with an introduction to Social Impact Bonds. It then explores the means through which market-based competition and an investment proposition were anticipated, but did not emerge through the composition and enactment of the Bond. It concludes with an assessment of the anti-market device and the future of Social Impact Bonds.

PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW IMPLICATIONS OF ‘EQUAL CIVIL PARTNERSHIPS’

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 161-173
Author(s):  
Máire Ní Shúilleabháin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
Civil Partnership ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Domestic Law

AbstractThe Steinfeld and Keidan campaign for ‘equal civil partnerships’ is focussed on English domestic law. However, it also has profound implications from a private international law perspective. If the UK parliament extends civil partnership to include different-sex couples, this will close a long-standing gap in English private international law. If, on the other hand, it was decided to abolish civil partnership, this would extend the existing lacuna in English private international law, and might generate further collisions with human rights norms. This article explores these lacunae and associated human rights concerns—and suggests possible solutions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document