EU Immigration and Asylum Law and Policy Droit et Politique de l'Immigration et de l'Asile de l'UE

Print this article

by Ana Rita Gil (FDNUL/OMNIA) and Susana Almeida (IPL) 

The ECHR has again showed that the principles of effectiveness of protection of rights and of evolutive interpretation do not cease during “times of crisis”. When EU is facing the biggest migratory influx since the Yugoslavia War, the Court reinforced the protection that shall be afforded to migrants’ right to family reunification, affirming that such right must encompass same-sex couples. In the Pajić ruling it declared, on one hand, that same-sex unions should be considered as family life for the purposes of Article 8 ECHR. On the other hand, it put an end to the debate on whether the concept of family for immigration purposes would encompass such unions. However, even if its findings represent a step forward on what regards protection of migrant’s human rights, they do have some limitations, as an actual right to family reunification is yet to be recognised. Continue reading »

Print this article

par Jean-Baptiste Farcy, Eimear O’Neill and David Watt, Réseau Odysseus, projet OMNIA

La « crise des réfugiés » a disparu des manchettes des journaux européens, bien sûr en partie à cause des attaques terroristes de Bruxelles, mais apparemment aussi parce que l’accord entre l’Union européenne et la Turquie conclu le 18 mars dernier semble avoir atteint son véritable objectif, au moins temporairement. Celui-ci consistait à empêcher les migrants, y compris les demandeurs d’asile, de quitter la Turquie en direction de la Grèce. Cela ne veut pas dire que la crise est terminée, même si l’Union et ses États membres souhaitent tourner la page de ce chapitre difficile de leur histoire. Les enseignements de la conférence du Réseau Odysseus relative à la solidarité, les 26 et 27 Février à Bruxelles, prennent alors une signification particulière dans ce contexte. Continue reading »

Print this article

By Jean-Baptiste Farcy, Eimear O’Neill and David Watt, Odysseus Network OMNIA Project Team

The “refugee crisis” has disappeared from the headlines of European news, of course in part because of the Brussels terror attacks, but also apparently because the agreement between the EU and Turkey concluded on 18th March seems, at least temporarily, to have reached its real goal: preventing migrants, including asylum seekers, from leaving Turkey in the direction of Greece.  However, this does not mean that the crisis is over, even if the EU and its Member States want to forget this difficult chapter in their history. We are therefore returning to the topic of EU solidarity, presenting what we learned at the Odysseus Network conference on 26 and 27 February, including the legal nature of solidarity, the reasons solidarity has failed and our hope for a better implementation of solidarity in the future. Continue reading »

Print this article

By Henri Labayle, Centre de Documentation et de Recherches Européennes (CDRE) & Philippe de Bruycker, IEE/ULB 

The agreement concluded on the 18 March between the EU and Turkey deserves attention due to both the severity of the crisis and the largely negative public opinion surrounding the draft of the text which appeared on the 7 March. The serious legal questions which persist feed doubts about not only the viability of the proposed solution, but also its implementation in practice (1). Conversely, doubts no longer remain on the ability of the Union to renounce its fundamental values (2). The market of “subcontracting”, as already mentioned on this blog, has now been finalised and is beginning to be implemented. Continue reading »

Print this article

By Henri Labayle, Centre de Documentation et de Recherches Européennes (CDRE) & Philippe de Bruycker, IEE/ULB 

L’arrestation en Belgique de l’un des responsables des attentats du mois de novembre à Paris, ajouté ce jour aux attentats abominables de Bruxelles, a rejeté au second plan l’accord passé entre l’Union européenne et la Turquie, à la veille du week-end.

Ce dernier était pourtant sous les feux des projecteurs médiatiques, à la fois en raison de la gravité de la crise sur le terrain mais aussi au vu de l’accueil largement négatif réservé par l’opinion publique aux échanges au premier jet du 7 mars. « Sommet d’approfondissement » des 6 points d’accord préalable, la lecture de la Déclaration du Conseil européen qui le conclut, accompagnée de celle des conclusions à proprement parler, n’indique en rien une sortie de crise au vu du contexte dans lequel cet accord s’inscrit. Continue reading »

Print this article

by Daniel Thym, Universität Konstanz 

A sense of urgency and desperation had been building up among decision-makers in Brussels and national capitals over recent weeks. The acting Council Presidency warned that ‘we’re running out of time’, while German and Austrian politicians openly considered the move towards a domestic ‘Plan B’. In short: the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) and the Schengen Area may have been on the brink of collapse – and the effective closure of the Western Balkans route indicated that there was little time left to thwart a vicious circle which could be a serious throwback to both EU integration and effective refugee protection. This danger has been averted for the moment: the EU managed to buy some time in order to find out whether the ‘deal’ with Turkey will deliver, a result which is no foregone conclusion for legal and operational reasons.

Pro-refugee NGOs were quick to castigate the deal for falling foul of the EU’s on legal standards and for being an anti-humanitarian solution, in particular insofar as forced returns to Turkey are concerned. Academics also present a critical outlook reiterating the legal criticism or criticising the EU for burden-shifting.

This blogpost will present a different perspective, although the critique highlights a number of valid concerns: it distracts from the EU’s internal shortcomings; some actors, such as Victor Orbán, reject refugee protection; others are unwilling, like the French government, to assume more responsibilities, also considering that many poorer countries accommodate greater numbers. But these caveats do not unmake the legal and conceptual value of the approach pursued by the EU: mass-influx scenarios require international cooperation. This optimism may prevail if a number of legal and political conditions are met when the small-print is being decided in the coming days. Continue reading »