Europeanization through Migration Policies: Legislative Comparison between Civil Law Systems and Common Law Systems

Within the European Union there are several states that have implemented laws, often following different paradigms, to cope not only with the increase in migratory flows, but also to foster the integration and participation of the migrants themselves in socio-political and economic life. In recent decades, immigration into Europe has become a matter of primary and strategic importance for the definition of both internal policies and the external relations of the Union. The progressive settlement of substantial national and ethnic groups poses important economic, social and cultural challenges, to which the policies implemented have so far only partially responded. Guiding concepts like integration, assimilation and respect for diversity still struggle to find an adequate realization in the reception policies of the European states. In this regard, a real revolution in this area was the realization of the “common basic principles” of 2004, which made member states become aware of the respect for fundamental rights, non-discrimination and equal opportunities for all (Niessen,. Schibel, 2007), and it later became a mere “Common agenda for Integration”. In this context, we can recall the decision of the Council and of the European Parliament n.1983 / 2006 which proclaimed 2008 as the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue. With this research, we intend to analyze the regulations concerning the migration of European governments and how they have changed over time, paying particular attention to the activation of inclusion strategies in some European Union countries; at the same time, we intend to find a strategy for a possible cooperation in the management of migratory processes. The integration regulations launched in Italy, Germany, France and the United Kingdom will be examined from the 1940s to 2015 and a comparative study will be conducted between the Community policies and the policies of four countries chosen to highlight common features and divergences.

Legislating for the Benefit of Children Born Out of Wedlock

This paper juxtaposes bioethical debates with legal developments concerning children born out of wedlock in Jordan, Egypt, and Tunisia; it seeks to demonstrate the relevance of national contexts for the study of Islamic bioethics. Debates about the import of genetic testing on Islamic notions of lineage and paternity could have an immediate and concrete impact on children whose parents were not married. Following a brief sketch of Islamic lineage rules, this paper traces their entanglement in national contexts through the regulation of citizenship, constitutional references, and laws of personal status, before it lays out the conflicting implications of an equal rights based statutory and international law on the one side, and shariatic lineage rules on the other. A legislative comparison shows that Egypt, Jordan, and Tunisia have used diverging strategies to manage – although not resolve – this inherent friction, which has already resulted in different legal situations for children born out of wedlock. I argue that the little consideration transnational fiqh councils have given to national and statutory differences complicates the transnational and normative aspects of Islamic bioethics. It speaks of the uneasy situation of Islamic jurisprudence in a political and legal context dominated by nation states and, I would argue, will influence the development of a burgeoning field.