Solidarity at work? The prevalence of emergency-driven solidarity in the administrative governance of the Common European Asylum System

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 667-686 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evangelia (Lilian) Tsourdi
Keyword(s):  
Refugee Crisis ◽  
Asylum Policy ◽  
Common Area ◽  
Common European Asylum System ◽  
The Common ◽  
Administrative Governance ◽  
Fair Sharing ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Area Of Protection

Policymakers conceptualize the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) as a ‘common area of protection and solidarity’. And yet, the absence of solidarity and fair-sharing in the administrative governance of the policy is glaringly salient. Against this backdrop, this article explores Article 80 TFEU, establishing the principle of ‘solidarity and fair-sharing of responsibility’. This analysis reveals it to be a principle that is structural to the EU asylum policy, dictates a certain ‘quality’ in the co-operation of the different actors, and affects the goal of the policy. To do this, after outlining the initial implementation design of the asylum policy, I examine ‘shifts’ in its administration modes, focusing on developments in responsibility-assignation, practical cooperation and EU funding. The analysis covers developments prompted by the 2015 ‘refugee crisis’, such as the emergency intra-EU relocation schemes, the emergence of new funding lines and the enhancement in the operational role of EU agencies. This article argues that, despite the rhetoric surrounding the solidarity principle, rather than being structurally embedded in the system’s administration modes, it remains emergency-driven. In this sense, the implementation design fails both to attain ‘fair sharing’, as well as to respond to what are essentially structural, rather than exceptional needs.

The Court of Justice of the EU and the Common European Asylum System: Entering the Third Phase of Harmonisation?

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 53-71
Author(s):  
Samuel Boutruche Zarevac
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Third Phase ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Common European Asylum System ◽  
Special Expertise ◽  
The Common ◽  
Fundamental Values ◽  
The Eu

Abstract ‘That assessment of the extent of the risk [of persecution] must, in all cases, be carried out with vigilance and care, since what are at issue are issues relating to the integrity of the person and to individual liberties, issues which relate to the fundamental values of the Union.’ The case law of the Court of Justice of the EU concerning the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) is still limited. Nonetheless, even this limited case law already offers interesting insights into analysing the potential role of the Court of Justice of the EU in the development of the CEAS, and this jurisprudence is in any event likely to grow significantly, due to the fact that the provisions of the CEAS are the result of a political compromise and so lack clarity. This chapter examines the ruling delivered by the Court in the case of Elgafaji, which contains certain elements which address the interpretative difficulties raised by Article 15(c) of the Qualification Directive, and goes on to consider, through a discussion of the recent ruling in Abdulla, the extent to which the Court’s interpretation of those provisions of the CEAS which replicate the wording of the 1951 Convention will influence the interpretation of this international instrument, and the difficulties presented in this context. The extent of this influence remains to be seen, but it is clear in any event that the Court of Justice is likely to play a major role in the development of the CEAS. One amendment which may prove necessary is the modification of the Court of Justice’s procedural rules such that it can take into account the views of third-party organisations with a special expertise in this field.

The Court of Justice of the EU and the Common European Asylum System: Entering the Third Phase of Harmonisation?

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 53-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel Boutruche Zarevac
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Third Phase ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Common European Asylum System ◽  
Special Expertise ◽  
The Common ◽  
Fundamental Values ◽  
The Eu

Abstract‘That assessment of the extent of the risk [of persecution] must, in all cases, be carried out with vigilance and care, since what are at issue are issues relating to the integrity of the person and to individual liberties, issues which relate to the fundamental values of the Union.’The case law of the Court of Justice of the EU concerning the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) is still limited. Nonetheless, even this limited case law already offers interesting insights into analysing the potential role of the Court of Justice of the EU in the development of the CEAS, and this jurisprudence is in any event likely to grow significantly, due to the fact that the provisions of the CEAS are the result of a political compromise and so lack clarity. This chapter examines the ruling delivered by the Court in the case of Elgafaji, which contains certain elements which address the interpretative difficulties raised by Article 15(c) of the Qualification Directive, and goes on to consider, through a discussion of the recent ruling in Abdulla, the extent to which the Court’s interpretation of those provisions of the CEAS which replicate the wording of the 1951 Convention will influence the interpretation of this international instrument, and the difficulties presented in this context. The extent of this influence remains to be seen, but it is clear in any event that the Court of Justice is likely to play a major role in the development of the CEAS. One amendment which may prove necessary is the modification of the Court of Justice’s procedural rules such that it can take into account the views of third-party organisations with a special expertise in this field.

scholarly journals Bordering on Conventional: The Politics of Iraqi Resettlement to the US and Europe, 2003–2011

Refuge ◽  
1969 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-136
Author(s):  
Chantal E. Berman
Keyword(s):  
Refugee Crisis ◽  
Iraqi Refugees ◽  
Strategic Objectives ◽  
The Us ◽  
Common European Asylum System ◽  
Eu Policies ◽  
The Common ◽  
Iraqi Refugee ◽  
Iraqi Freedom ◽  
The Eu

Of some 2.5 million Iraqi citizens internationally displaced in the wake of Operation Iraqi Freedom, less than 100,000 have achieved permanent international resettlement. This paper compares US and EU policies regulating the selection and admission of Iraqi refugees since 2003, focusing on the divergent political priorities and structural considerations underpinning variations in resettlement levels during this time. I argue that US resettlement of Iraqi refugees is primarily an element of foreign policy, defined by strategic objectives in Iraq and the surrounding region, whereas admissions to the EU reflect ongoing intra-European debates surrounding the construction and modification of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). Whereas resettlement to the US increased drastically following a “strategic” reframing of the Iraqi refugee crisis in 2007, failures in the implementation of CEAS’s “standardization” agenda, compounded by enhanced European restrictions on refugee movement, have limited Iraqi admissions to Europe during this time.

The Right to Healthcare in the Common European Asylum System

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-156
Author(s):  
Marco Inglese
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Undocumented Migrants ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Common European Asylum System ◽  
The Common ◽  
Interpretative Approach ◽  
The Right

Abstract This article seeks to ascertain the role of healthcare in the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). The article is structured as follows. First, it outlines the international conceptualisation of healthcare in the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the European Social Charter (ESC) before delving into the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Second, focusing on the European Union (EU), it analyses the role of Article 35 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter) in order to verify its impact on the development of the CEAS. Third, and in conclusion, it will argue that the identification of the role of healthcare in the CEAS should be understood in light of the Charter’s scope of application. This interpretative approach will be beneficial for asylum seekers and undocumented migrants, as well as for the Member States (MSs).

scholarly journals Current Challenges of European Integration - 12th Network Europe Conference, 9 – 10 November 2020

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
André S. Berne ◽  
Jelena Ceranic Perisic ◽  
Viorel Cibotaru ◽  
Alex de Ruyter ◽  
Ivana Kunda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
European Integration ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Majority Vote ◽  
Integration Process ◽  
Asylum Policy ◽  
Massive Influx ◽  
The Common ◽  
First Time ◽  
The Eu

Crises are not a new phenomenon in the context of European integration. Additional integration steps could often only be achieved under the pressure of crises.  At present, however, the EU is characterised by multiple crises, so that the integration process as a whole is sometimes being questioned. In 2015, the crisis in the eurozone had escalated to such an extent that for the first time a member state was threatened to leave the eurozone. Furthermore, the massive influx of refugees into the EU has revealed the shortcomings of the Schengen area and the common asylum policy. Finally, with the majority vote of the British in the referendum of 23 June 2016 in favour of the Brexit, the withdrawal of a member state became a reality for the first time. Even in the words of the European Commission, the EU has reached a crossroads. Against this background, the twelfth Network Europe conference included talks on the numerous challenges and future integration scenarios in Europe. 

COMMON EUROPEAN ASYLUM SYSTEM: THE CAUSES OF THE CRISIS AND ITS CONSEQUENCES FOR EUROPEAN CONSTITUTIONALISM

2021 ◽  
pp. 81-91
Author(s):  
S.I. Kodaneva
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Existing Problems ◽  
Massive Influx ◽  
Common European Asylum System ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu

The massive influx of refugees from the Middle East in 2015 caused a crisis in the Common European Asylum System, which provoked a European constitutional crisis. This review presents three articles that formulate the existing problems and the risks they cause for the EU, as well as analyzing their causes and prerequisites.

15. Justice and Home Affairs

2020 ◽  
pp. 343-362
Author(s):  
Sandra Lavenex
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Focal Point ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Asylum Policy ◽  
Intergovernmental Cooperation ◽  
The Common ◽  
Immigration And Asylum ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
Peripheral Aspect ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the European Union’s justice and home affairs (JHA), which have evolved from a peripheral aspect into a focal point of European integration and today are at the centre of politicization in the EU. It first considers the institutionalization of JHA cooperation and its gradual move towards more supranational competences before discussing political contestation as expressed in the context of Brexit and the crisis of the common asylum and Schengen systems. The development of cooperation is retraced, looking at the main actors in the JHA, the organization and capacities of EU institutions, the continuity of intergovernmentalism, the proliferation of semi-autonomous agencies and databases, and the flow of policy, taking into account asylum policy and immigration policy, police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, and the challenge of implementation. The chapter shows how the gradual move of cooperation among national agencies concerned with combating crime; fighting terrorism; and managing borders, immigration, and asylum from loose intergovernmental cooperation to more supranational governance within the EU has remained contested, and argues that this contestation exemplifies the limits of political unification.

The EU in the Central Mediterranean: Impact and Implications of the Comprehensive Approach

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Dura
Keyword(s):  
Comprehensive Approach ◽  
Refugee Crisis ◽  
Crucial Importance ◽  
Joint Operation ◽  
Central Mediterranean ◽  
Military Operation ◽  
Migrant Smuggling ◽  
Defence Policy ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The implications of the comprehensive approach to the EU refugee crisis are becoming apparent in the current actions of different players in the central Mediterranean, where a Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) military operation is present alongside Frontex’s joint operation Triton. Both cooperate closely with Libyan border authorities and the European Migrant Smuggling Centre of Europol. But this not only poses humanitarian problems as to how the EU should cooperate on these matters with Libyan officials, it also leads to a confusing meddling of different EU actors from distinct policy areas in matters of crucial importance to the Union. Against this background, the article delineates the competences and powers of the different actors. Another issue is the role of the European Parliament in the situation: it has little influence in the CSDP but strong links to the agencies. In this context the article will discuss the influence of the cooperation on parliamentary accountability.

The Common Agricultural Policy: A Case of Embedded Liberalism

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christilla Roederer-Rynning
Keyword(s):  
Agricultural Policy ◽  
Common Agricultural Policy ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
Embedded Liberalism ◽  
The Common ◽  
Eastern European Countries ◽  
National Governments ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Domestic Impact

The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) can be fruitfully construed as an instance of European embedded liberalism, shaped by overlapping layers of domestic, European Union, and international policymaking. Such a conceptualization reveals the large role of domestic politics, even in an area like the CAP, where policy competences were early on extensively transferred to the supranational level. This in turn reflects the rather prominent role of national governments in the EU construction, compared with traditional federal polities. This role can be probed by analyzing two related scholarly agendas: an agenda devoted to the shaping of the CAP by member states (policy shaping); and an agenda devoted to the domestic impact of the CAP. Current policy challenges highlight our need to develop our understanding of: (1) the interaction between different types of CAP decisions at the EU level; (2) the domestic impact of the CAP; (3) and the experience of Central and Eastern European Countries (CEEC).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document