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.

The Practices of ‘Splitting’ and ‘Common Accord’ Under Scrutiny: the European Parliament‘s Request for an Opinion of the European Court of Justice on the Istanbul Convention

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 472-486
Author(s):  
Elizaveta Samoilova
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Forms Of Violence ◽  
Istanbul Convention ◽  
The Eu

Abstract With all eyes on the recent global COVID-19 pandemic, another pandemic has been growing in the shadows: violence against women. The Council of Europe’s Istanbul Convention creates a legal framework in order to protect women against all forms of violence. Its ratification process, however, has faced considerable challenges, particularly in the Central and Eastern European Member States. This article discusses the basic elements of the Istanbul Convention, reflects on the ratification process in the EU and its Member States, and sets out the main legal issues raised in the European Parliament’s request for an opinion (A-1/19 of 22 November 2019) to the Court of Justice of the European Union. Special focus is put on the choice of the correct EU legal basis and the practices of ‘splitting’ and ‘common accord’. This article argues that the European Parliament’s request for an opinion provides the perfect opportunity for the Court of Justice of the European Union to further clarify the law and the practice of concluding mixed agreements by the EU and its Member States.

Front-of-pack nutrition labelling in the European Union: a behavioural, legal and political analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Vincent DELHOMME
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Dietary Habits ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Present Contribution ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Nutrition Labelling ◽  
Political Analysis ◽  
Legislative Proposal ◽  
The Eu

Amidst a growing interest from European Union (EU) Member States, the European Commission recently announced that it would put forward a legislative proposal for the adoption of a harmonised and mandatory front-of-pack nutrition labelling scheme at the EU level. The present contribution discusses the implications of such an adoption, taking a behavioural, legal and policy angle. It introduces first the concept of front-of-pack nutrition labelling and the existing evidence regarding its effects on consumer behaviour and dietary habits. It then presents the legal framework currently applicable to (front-of-pack) nutrition labelling in the EU and discusses some of the main political and practical aspects involved with the development of a common EU front-of-pack label.

On-going evaluation of the WFD 2000/60/EC implementation process in the European Union, seven years after its launch: are we behind schedule?

Water Policy ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Kanakoudis ◽  
S. Tsitsifli
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Water Resources ◽  
Water Framework Directive ◽  
Implementation Process ◽  
Considerable Progress ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Water Legislation ◽  
The Eu

Although the European Union (EU) has made some considerable progress regarding protection of water resources (tackling significant problems at national and at EU level), increased efforts are still needed to get and keep its waters clean. After 30 years of developing EU water legislation, all the involved stakeholders express this demand. In 2000, the Water Framework Directive (WFD) 2000/60/EC, establishing a framework for Community actions regarding protection of water resources, was adopted. Its implementation is now well underway, as most of the EU-Member States have fulfilled their current obligations of submitting their reports. An on-going evaluation of the WFD implementation process is attempted here, based on all available data seven years after its launch. Special focus is given to Greece regarding problems that have occurred.

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.

Caught Between National and Supranational Values: Limitations to Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters as Part of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice within the European Union

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-72
Author(s):  
Olivia den Hollander
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Third ◽  
The One ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
The Eu

AbstractCurrently, the European Union is based on both supranational (first pillar) and international (second and third pillar) law. The third pillar signifies police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters and although formally based on international law, it has been under increasing "supranational pressure" by the developments in the "Area of Freedom, Security and Justice". This Area is focused on a set of common values and principles closely tied to those of the single market and its four "freedoms". The main argument of this article is that the legal framework of the third pillar is an impediment to judicial cooperation in criminal matters in general, and to the coordination of conflicts of jurisdiction and the principle of ne bis in idem in particular. The legal framework of the third pillar finds itself in the middle of an identity crisis, since it can neither be identified as a traditional intergovernmental, nor as a supranational institutional framework. Criminal law is a politically sensitive matter, which on the one hand explains why the EU member states are reluctant to submit their powers over the issue to the European level and on the other hand, it implies that if the EU member states really want to cooperate on such an intensive level, they will have to submit some of their powers in order to strengthen EU constitutional law. The article suggests a reform of the third pillar through the method of "communitization", which is exactly what will happen in case the EU Reform Treaty will enter into force. This would offer the ingredients for a true international community in which the ambitious agenda of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice can realise its aim of a common set of values and principles which supersedes those of each of the member states individually.

Scratching the heart of the artichoke? How international institutions and the European Union constrain the state monopoly of force

2011 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 445-468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Herschinger ◽  
Markus Jachtenfuchs ◽  
Christiane Kraft-Kasack
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
The State ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Physical Force ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
European Court ◽  
Core Areas ◽  
Over Time

In recent years, a growing literature has argued that European Union (EU) member states have undergone a profound transformation caused by international institutions and by the EU, in particular. However, the state core – the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force, embodied by the police – seemed to remain intact. The literature has argued that in this area, international institutions are weak, and cooperation has remained informal and intergovernmental. We take issue with these claims and evaluate the strength of international institutions in two core areas of policing (terrorism and drugs) over time. We find that in terms of decision-making, precision, and adjudication, international institutions have become considerably stronger over time. Even when international institutions remain intergovernmental they strongly regulate how EU member states exercise their monopoly of force. Member states are even further constrained because adjudication is delegated to the European Court of Justice. Thus, even the state core is undergoing a significant transformation.

Local law repercussions on EU extradition law

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Niblock ◽  
Anna Oehmichen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Mutual Trust ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Local Law

The present article examines the developments of extradition law in Europe, with a special focus on case law in England & Wales and Germany. It explores the effects that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union has had on extradition law within Europe, and how the tensions between mutual trust and fundamental rights protection in this area have been addressed by the two jurisdictions.

scholarly journals THE CONCEPT OF “THIRD SAFE COUNTRY” IN THE EUROPEAN UNION LAW

2018 ◽  
pp. 90-98
Author(s):  
N. Mushak
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Geneva Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Political Group ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Eu

The article investigates the concept of "safe third country" in the law of the European Union. The article analyzes a number of international legal instruments that define the content of the concept of "safe third country". The research provides the definition of "safe third country". In particular, the safe third country should be determined as the country whose territory a person is crossing through the territory of the state where such person is seeking for the asylum, with the ability of that person to apply for asylum and use proper and relevant procedures. In fact, the concept of "safe third country" is applied by the EU Member States only when it is safe to guarantee that foreigners will be able to use the fair asylum procedures on the territory through they passed, and such persons shall be provided the effective protection of their rights. The article also determines the cases of the concept application by the EU Member States. In particular, the competent authorities of the EU Member States are confident that the third country the following aspects should be guaranted: the life and liberty of the applicant are not at risk due to race, religion, nationality, membership to a particular social or political group; the principle of prohibition of expulsion under the Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees, 1951 shall be observed; the principle of prohibition of expulsion in case of violation of the right to be subjected to torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment envisaged by international law is been respected; there is the possibility to apply for a refugee status and to receive protection under the Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees 1951.

scholarly journals The 346 Clause of TFEU Regulation in Different EU Member States

Teisė ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 123-138
Author(s):  
Vilius Kuzminskas
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court

The article discloses the fixed exclusion regulation of Clause 346 in the Treaty of Function of the European Union in different EU member states. A further assessment of different relevant judicial approaches to regulation are disclosed and evaluated in accordance with the European Court of Justice case law and procurement in the defense area doctrine.

scholarly journals Country’s Political and Legal Framework for Regulating Migration Processes in the Context of the Crisis Development of the World Community

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 85-91
Author(s):  
M. L. Galas
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Civil Conflicts ◽  
World Community ◽  
The World ◽  
Legal Restrictions ◽  
Migration Flows ◽  
European Migration

The article analyses the risks of “aftershocks” of secondary post-crisis migration from the countries of the European Union, reorientation of migration flows of post-crisis migration due to changes in European migration legislation, the introduction of legal restrictions on granting refugee status, asylum to emergency migrants, as well as due to the exhaustion of economic, social, political and other resources for receiving migration flows from countries experiencing armed, civil conflicts, crisis situations, environmental and natural resource disasters, undergoing other unfavourable conditions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document