scholarly journals The Problem of Illegal Channel-crossing

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 92-98
Author(s):  
Kira Godovanyuk ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Transition Period ◽  
International Crime ◽  
Border Control ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Illegal Migration ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Dublin Regulation ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

In 2020 the number of illegal small boat Channel-crossings to the UK drastically increased (nearly 7000 registered cases). This sparked sharp discussions on measures of countering illegal migration, border control and improvement of asylum policy. The phenomenon of illegal Channel-crossing is related to a wider spectrum of problems beyond international protection and rescue operations, border management and countering international crime (human smuggling and trafficking). The UK withdrawal from the European asylum system after the transition period poses a major challenge. The author argues that the UK’s ambition is to have access to the asylum seekers return procedures stipulated in the Dublin regulation along with strengthening bilateral border control and policing cooperation with the EU member-states. The British authorities are considering different scenarios of bolstering border control including Royal Navy deployment to stop migrant boats. In the meantime, the authorities tend to overstate the problem of illegal migration in order to channel public opinion into the framework of the «take back control of national border» discourse and to put pressure on the EU. The top priority now for Britain is to conclude a Readmission agreement with the European Union.

Implications of Brexit for Skilled Migration from India to the UK

2021 ◽  
pp. 001573252110122
Author(s):  
Rupa Chanda ◽  
Neha Vinod Betai
Keyword(s):  
Transition Period ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Jel Codes ◽  
Decision To Leave ◽  
East European ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Take Back ◽  
The Uk ◽  
European Economies ◽  
The Eu

In June 2016, the United Kingdom took the world by surprise with the results of its referendum on whether to remain in the European Union (EU). With a 52% majority, the country decided to leave the bloc in which it had been a member since 1973. With this outcome began the long process of Brexit negotiations between UK and the EU. The UK officially ceased to be an EU member on 31 January 2020, with a transition period up to the end of 2020. The decision to leave the EU came on the back of rising bitterness among people. Membership in the EU was seen as expensive and not beneficial to the country. One of the major campaigning points of the leave camp was the issue of immigration. Given that free movement of people is an important part of being in the EU, the party argued that leaving the EU would help the country take back control of its borders. Immigration in the UK has been on the rise since the early 2000s. It shot up further with the accession of the eight East European economies into the EU. Figure 1 shows how, leading up to Brexit, immigration from the EU to the UK was constantly increasing. JEL Codes: F00, F30, F22, F23

Pre-departure Integration Strategies in the European Union: Integration or Immigration Policy?

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kees Groenendijk
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Policy Instrument ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Debate ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legal Constraints ◽  
Integration Strategies ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

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?

Frontex: Towards a Common Policy on External Border Control

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 359-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberta Mungianu
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Border Control ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Joint Operations ◽  
And Control ◽  
European Agency ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Common Policy

Abstract Operational cooperation at the external borders of the EU is part of the EU process of supranationalisation since 2006, when the Justice and Home Affairs Council Conclusions identified operational cooperation as a component of a common policy on external border control. Operational cooperation is supported by the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (Frontex). In this article I will focus on the extent to which the establishment of Frontex marks the shift of sovereignty from Member States to EU institutions in EU external border control. The analysis of two aspects of operational cooperation through Frontex – joint operations and European Border Guard Teams – shows the EU’s achievement in implementing a common policy on external border control. Nevertheless, EU Member States’ ‘sovereignty clauses’ for the surveillance and control of their external borders prevent the EU from fully exercising its power.

scholarly journals Trade and Cooperation Agreement Between the EU and the UK: Conditionality Versus Sovereignty

2021 ◽  
Vol 102 (2) ◽  
pp. 5-16
Author(s):  
Lyudmila Babynina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Economic Losses ◽  
Customs Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cooperation Agreement ◽  
British Case ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

The United Kingdom left the European Union on January 31, 2020. On December 31, 2020, the transition period ended, during which all EU rules and regulations applied to Britain. The trade agreement was reached in record time, but it is too early to talk about long-term mutual benefits. The British case in the system of trade and economic agreements of the European Union is unique. On the one hand, at the time of the negotiations, the UK retained EU law, was a member of the EU Single Internal Market and Customs Union, subject to the jurisdiction of the EU Court of Justice. On the other hand, the EU for the first time found itself in a situation when a third country was determined to distance itself as much as possible from EU rules while concluding a trade agreement, despite the obvious economic losses. At the same time, both sides understood that the absence of an agreement threatened all interested actors with serious losses, and that it must be concluded. As a result, the compromise text of the TCA reflects the fundamentally different approaches of the parties to bilateral cooperation, and its provisions suggest a change of its format in the future.

The (Rebuttable) Presumption of the European Union Member States as ‘Safe Countries’ under the Dublin Regulation

2012 ◽  
pp. 240-255
Author(s):  
Cristina Contartese
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
European Court ◽  
Dublin Regulation ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
European Union Member States ◽  
The Eu

The purpose of this chapter is to analyze a particular aspect of the so-called Dublin Regulation, whose aim is to determine the European Union (EU) Member State responsible for examining an asylum application, that is, the presumption that the EU Member States are “safe countries.” Although the notion of “safe country” is on the base of the Dublin Regulation functioning mechanism, as it implies that any EU Member States can transfer an asylum seeker to any other EU country which is responsible, the authors contend that the safety of an EU Member State can be given as presumed for the purpose of asylum seekers. The analysis of the present work starts, firstly, with the examination of the notion of “safe country” under the Dublin Regulation. In the second part, relying on the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECHR) case-law, it will be discussed to what extent the Court of Strasbourg clarifies the notion of “safe countries” and the test it applies to it. Finally, the Commission’s proposal for a recasting of the Dublin Regulation will be analysed with the aim of foresee possible future developments of the EU law mechanisms to rebut such a presumption as applied to the EU Member States. It will emerge that in order to assess the safety of an EU Member State, attention has to be given to the prohibition of both direct and indirect refoulement as well as to the effective remedy at the EU Member State’s domestic level.

scholarly journals Crimmigration checks in the internal border areas of the EU: Finding the discretion that matters

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maartje van der Woude ◽  
Joanne van der Leun
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Interdisciplinary Approach ◽  
Border Control ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Discretionary Power ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Law Enforcement Officials ◽  
Border Areas ◽  
The Eu

Internal borders are a major but understudied site of crimmigration as most scholarship has focused on external borders (Van der Woude and Van Berlo, 2015). Internal borders were supposed to disappear under the principle of free movement within the European Union. But today we see EU member states policing the borders inside Schengen, checking identification, verifying passage, and regulating mobility in so-called ‘gray zones’. This article investigates this type of policing within the EU, focusing on the case of the Netherlands. It argues that the policing of internal borders is highly dependent upon discretionary power, a significant factor in the crimmigration process that we do not know enough about. Following Hawkins (1992, 2003), Schneider (1992), and Bushway and Forst (2013) on discretion and discretionary decision-making, we examine the interaction between decisions by law-makers and policy-makers that create discretionary space for law enforcement officials on the ground, and the way in which these street-level bureaucrats perceive the discretionary space attributed to them. By zeroing in on the interaction between these two actors, we aim to find the discretionary decision that matters the most in terms of explaining the crimmigration practices, offering a more holistic and interdisciplinary approach to border control. We discuss the implications of this power and the consequences for the European Project as such.

Breaking Up Is Hard to Do – What Brexit Means for UK Insolvency and Restructuring Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 338-376
Author(s):  
Gerard McCormack
Keyword(s):  
Automatic Recognition ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Insolvency Law ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Insolvency Regulation ◽  
Corporate Restructurings ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Insolvency Proceedings ◽  
The Eu

Abstract This paper asks whether the UK can maintain its insolvency and restructuring pre-eminence post Brexit i. e. after Britain’s departure from the European Union (EU). In the past 20 years or so, the UK is said to have become the insolvency and restructuring capital of Europe or in less politically correct terms, the bankruptcy brothel of Europe. In part, this is because of the European Insolvency Regulation which provides for automatic recognition of insolvency proceedings opened in a EU Member State in the other EU Member States. Such proceedings may make provision for the discharge of debts and the restructuring of financial obligations.The specific insolvency law regime is part of a more general European Private International Law framework. With Brexit, the UK has now left this framework without any negotiated replacement agreement, a so-called ‘skinny’ Brexit. The loss of the ability to deal with insolvencies and corporate restructurings through a single process, with automatic recognition across the EU, may make it more complex, lengthy and expensive to resolve cross-border cases. It gives rise to the prospect of parallel proceedings in different jurisdictions. The paper also addresses how any disadvantages associated with the ‘skinny’ Brexit may be alleviated.

scholarly journals Migration Policy of the European Union on the Countries of Northern Africa

2019 ◽  
pp. 67-83
Author(s):  
Zinaida Sviashchenko
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
North Africa ◽  
Professional Training ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
Special Role ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Illegal Migration ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

The article is devoted to the actual issues of the European Union migration policy with regard to the countries of North Africa. Indeed, the intensive migration movement that has recently taken place in Europe has forced the EU to develop a new, adequate migration policy that would be able to effectively address the problems encountered in this area. The reasons and the current state of migration processes are investigated. The main directions and areas of regulation of migration processes in the European Union concerning the countries of North Africa are highlighted. In particular, attention is drawn to such an important direction of the EU migration policy as the fight against illegal migration. The main problems of regulation of migration processes, in particular, labor migrants and refugees, are outlined. The substantial quantitative and qualitative changes that have taken place in the migration processes from the countries of North Africa to Europe have been analyzed. The general economic consequences of migration from the countries of North Africa for donor countries and recipient countries are described. Attention is drawn to the issue of professional training of Africans for further employment in the EU. It is concluded that migration in the EU countries plays a special role due to the aging of the population in European countries and the need to attract labor from third countries. Migration flows between the countries of North Africa and the EU are particularly intense. This is due to the geographical proximity of these regions, as well as close economic, political and cultural ties. Among the priority areas of the EU migration policy, such as border management and the return of illegal migrants to their homeland, convergence of Member States practice in strengthening the common European regime, sharing responsibilities and ensuring the acceptance of refugees with their further resettlement among EU member states.

scholarly journals Retail Payments Strategy for the EU versus the challenges of the payment sector

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 617-640
Author(s):  
Michał Polasik ◽  
Paweł Widawski ◽  
Grzegorz Keler ◽  
Agnieszka Butor-Keler
Keyword(s):  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Future ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Depth Study ◽  
Payments Systems ◽  
Payment Services ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Retail Payments ◽  
The Eu

Motivation: The payment services sector has become one of the main areas for the development of financial innovation and the key element of the digital economy. However, the payment services market in the European Union (called the European Payments Market) is still fragmented along national borders, insufficiently integrated, and facing several challenges. Therefore, the newly announced Retail Payments Strategy for the EU is a document of great importance for the future of the entire EU economy, and deserves in-depth study. Aim: The purpose of this paper is to assess whether the trends and challenges identified by the European Commission in the Retail Payments Strategy, and the general directions and proposed actions presented in this document, appropriately reflect the challenges faced by the European payment market. Results: A comparative analysis of the Strategy’s assumptions and proposed actions was conducted, in relation to the identified challenges of the payment sector. The empirical data were derived from a survey of 202 experts from all EU member states, and the UK, Norway and Switzerland, covering all types of bank and non-bank payment market players. The analysis confirmed that the Strategy identified the main challenges and opportunities, in line with the results of the expert survey: the need for further development of open banking; cross-border integration and development of instant payments systems; and ensuring access to the banking payment infrastructure, including contactless and NFC mobile payments. However, the proposed directions of action in selected areas have not been sufficiently rationalised, and most of the actions have been left to be specified in the future. In addition, the Strategy relies mostly on the use of regulatory tools that may limit innovativeness. Although the Commission and the surveyed experts agreed in recognising the challenges related to the increasing role of BigTechs in the payment sector, no comprehensive solution addressing the related challenges was proposed in the Strategy.

scholarly journals GIBRALTAR AND BREXIT

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 445-454
Author(s):  
V.V. Pushkareva
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Political Agenda ◽  
Customs Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Territorial Dispute ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

The withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union with its overseas possessions returned to the political agenda the territorial dispute between Madrid and London over the Gibraltar semi-enclave. The opposite points of view have collided in the context of Brexit: the UK fundamentally defends its sovereignty over Gibraltar, Spain strives to regain the lost territory, the Gibraltarians want to maintain association with the Kingdom and not break with the European Union, the European Union is not eager to grant Gibraltar a special status, but at the same time is interested in maintaining a preferential financial zone in the South of the Iberian Peninsula. Separate issues of relations between the UK and Spain on the situation of Gibraltar for the transition period were agreed, they are set out in the “4 Memoranda”. The further fate of the territory depends on the UK's deal with the EU. The contracting parties guarantee that the interests of both Spain and Gibraltar are taken into account. Possible options: holding a referendum on the independence of Gibraltar; gaining control of Spain over the strategic objects of Gibraltar as a result of the deal; Gibraltar remains under the sovereignty of the United Kingdom and continues to cooperate with the EU; dual Spanish-British sovereignty will be established over Gibraltar; at the end of Brexit Gibraltar will not cooperate with the EU. But each of the proposed solutions requires certain concessions from the disputing parties. They are not ready to compromise yet. The authorities of Gibraltar, however, are aware that without cooperation with the UK, Spain and the European Union, their further successful state and development is impossible. More favorable conditions, in our opinion, for the Gibraltarians will arise with the accession to the Schengen area and the Customs Union.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document