scholarly journals The Threat of Destitution as a Deterrent against Asylum Seeking in the European Union

Refuge ◽  
2006 ◽  
pp. 81-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvie Da Lomba
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Host Countries ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The problematization of asylum has detrimentally impacted on the provision of support for asylum seekers in host countries. The threat of destitution has become instrumental in restrictive asylum policies and is increasingly used as a deterrent against asylum seeking. The EU experience reveals acute tensions between the EU asylum agenda and the EU Member States’ obligations under international refugee and human rights law. The provision of support for asylum seekers challenges narrow approaches to the realization of socio-economic rights for “others” and to host countries’ duties in that respect. The EU Reception Conditions Directive, which aims to set out standards for the reception of asylum seekers across the Union, exemplifies this predicament. Yet international refugee and human rights law provides a legal framework that establishes minimum standards critical to dignified living for asylum seekers and the protection of the right to seek refugee status in the EU and beyond.

Equality and Non-discrimination Law in the EU

2021 ◽  
pp. 387-462
Author(s):  
Jan Wouters ◽  
Michal Ovádek
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Treaty Of Rome ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

This chapter addresses equality and non-discrimination, which are explicitly acknowledged as foundational values in the EU context in Article 2 TEU. Similarly, the right to non-discrimination enjoys wide recognition in international human rights law. In the EU, non-discrimination had a specific role to play from the outset of European integration. Despite being founded without explicit reference to human rights, the original Treaty of Rome nonetheless prohibited discrimination on the basis of nationality (now Article 18 TFEU), as well as discrimination regarding pay between men and women (now Article 157 TFEU). Today, the scope of non-discrimination was enlarged, paving the way for Directives on racial equality and non-discrimination in the field of employment on the grounds of religion, disability, age, and sexual orientation. Moreover, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) identified the principle of equality as a general principle of EU law.

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.

Public participation in decisions on specific activities in environmental matters in Croatia

elni Review ◽  
2012 ◽  
pp. 13-19
Author(s):  
Lana Ofak
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Aarhus Convention ◽  
Specific Activities ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Croatia finished accession negotiations with the EU in June 2011. The Accession Treaty was signed on 9 December 2011. The EU accession referendum in Croatia was held in January 2012 with a positive outcome. 66.27% of Croatian citizens voted in favour of Croatian accession to the European Union and 33.13% of votes were against the accession. Following ratification of the Accession Treaty by the 27 EU member states, accession of Croatia to the EU is expected to take place on 1 July 2013. In the 2011 Progress Report, European Commission stated that there has been progress in the area of environment. Overall, Croatia’s environmentorientated preparations are nearing completion in terms of both alignment and implementation of the relevant legislation. However, implementation of the horizontal acquis, and in particular effective public participation and access to justice in environmental matters, need to be improved. The purpose of this article is twofold. Firstly, it provides a general overview of the legal framework for public participation in decisions on specific activities in Croatia, which is intended to implement provisions of Art. 6 of the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (hereinafter: the Aarhus Convention or Convention). Implementation of Art. 7 and 8 of the Aarhus Convention are not discussed. Secondly, specific problems in exercising the right to participate in environmental impact assessment procedures in Croatia are analysed. It is shown that there are cases of non-compliance with the provisions of Art. 6 of the Aarhus Convention.

scholarly journals European Asylum Policy and Procedures - Violating Human Rights?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florence Nabiyar
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Life Stories ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Racial Violence ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Asylum Policy ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
The Eu

Based on the human rights approach this study investigates the process of gaining asylum in the European Union (EU) from the first step which is access to the territory, up to the last point of deportation and/or the granting of refugee status. A qualitative study is used to examine two countries with the largest numbers of refugees around the world: Afghanistan and Syria. The method consists of a thematic analysis of six videos that cover the real life stories and narratives of eighteen asylum seekers from different countries of the EU. The findings and existing literature conclude that asylum seekers face many obstacles and challenges, and that EU asylum policy and procedures are violating human rights. These EU rights violations include closing the borders, putting asylum seekers in prison, forced deportation, homelessness, poverty and racial violence. Ultimately, this research concludes that even though all these European countries are signatories of the United Nations/Geneva Conventions, in reality they do not fulfill their obligations.

scholarly journals European Asylum Policy and Procedures - Violating Human Rights?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florence Nabiyar
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Life Stories ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Racial Violence ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Asylum Policy ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
The Eu

Based on the human rights approach this study investigates the process of gaining asylum in the European Union (EU) from the first step which is access to the territory, up to the last point of deportation and/or the granting of refugee status. A qualitative study is used to examine two countries with the largest numbers of refugees around the world: Afghanistan and Syria. The method consists of a thematic analysis of six videos that cover the real life stories and narratives of eighteen asylum seekers from different countries of the EU. The findings and existing literature conclude that asylum seekers face many obstacles and challenges, and that EU asylum policy and procedures are violating human rights. These EU rights violations include closing the borders, putting asylum seekers in prison, forced deportation, homelessness, poverty and racial violence. Ultimately, this research concludes that even though all these European countries are signatories of the United Nations/Geneva Conventions, in reality they do not fulfill their obligations.

scholarly journals Social protection of non-removable rejected asylum-seekers in the EU

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 313-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Schoukens ◽  
Siemen Buttiens
Keyword(s):  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Social Protection ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Added Value ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
The Eu

Asylum-seekers whose application for international protection in the European Union (EU) is rejected receive a return decision. However, the enforcement of this decision may be temporarily impossible due to legal or practical barriers, or policy choices. An assessment of the provisions in the Returns Directive offering social protection to non-removable rejected asylum-seekers shows that only limited standards of protection are guaranteed. Consequently, the EU Member States are left plenty of room to manoeuvre. This article raises the question of what social protection this particular group is legally entitled to in a sample of 17 EU Member States. For the purpose of this article, ‘social protection’ is defined as access to the labour market, health care and social benefits. This study finds that Member States’ approaches differ markedly with respect to each of these three issues. Furthermore, it questions the added value of the current legal framework at the level of the EU. Finally, some suggestions for improving the level of social protection of non-removable rejected asylum seekers are put forward.

scholarly journals Assessing Maritime Security and Human Rights: The Role of the EU and its Member States in the Protection of Human Rights in the Maritime Domain

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 325-347
Author(s):  
Sofia Galani
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Maritime Security ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Over the years, the European Union (EU) and its Member States have taken significant steps to enhance maritime security. However, these initiatives are mostly focused on the safety of ships and the protection of the marine environment rather than the protection of human rights at sea. Without belittling the importance of these initiatives, this article argues that it is time the protection of human rights at sea was also incorporated in the efforts to enhance maritime security. This argument is supported by the analysis of the legal framework which shows that the EU and its Member States as flag, coastal or port States have assumed responsibility to protect human rights at sea under the law of the sea, human rights law and EU law.

scholarly journals The Concept of Integration in the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clíodhna Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
National Level ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Family Reunification ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Normative Development ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Core Issues ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Integration has become a recurring theme of national immigration policies; and there has been a corresponding normative development of the concept to a certain degree in the European Union, both in soft policy and through references to integration in legally binding immigration measures. The difficulty in defining integration is a pervasive problem encountered by lawyers and sociologists attempting to understand the phenomenon. This article argues that the development of the concept of integration by the European Court of Human Rights has an important contribution to make to the debate, with the potential to provide a legal framework within which to situate integration policies at the national and the EU level. It assesses the concept of integration employed by the European Court of Human Rights, analysing the Court’s Article 8 immigration jurisprudence in terms of two core issues: first, the conception of integration employed in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights; and second, the implications of the development of the concept in terms of impacting on the right to remain in a State Party and family reunification, each a key integration issue. The article concludes that while the jurisprudence relating to what actually constitutes ‘integration’ is very much in its infancy, the express consideration of integration as a factor in the balancing exercise undertaken by the Court in the expulsion cases signifies the start of a normative development of the concept of integration by the European Court of Human Rights. Nevertheless, it remains to be seen whether the increased emphasis of the Court on the integration criterion in the Article 8 expulsion cases influences the Court’s approach to key integration issues such as family reunification and in turn whether this filters down to legislators and policymakers at the national level.

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.

Fixing, Adjusting, Regulating, Protecting Human Rights - The Shifting Uses of Regularisations in the European Union

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 297-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albert Kraler
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Irregular Migrants ◽  
National Human ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Human Rights Based Approach ◽  
The Eu

AbstractAlmost all Member States in the European Union currently make use, or in the past have made use of some form of regularisation of irregular immigrants, although to greatly varying degrees, in different ways and as a rule only reluctantly. A distinct feature of recent regularisations has been the shift towards a humanitarian justification of regularisation measures. In this context, regularisation has become reframed as an issue of the protection of irregular migrants’ human rights. As a result, regularisation has to some extent also been turned from a political tool in managing migration into an issue of international, European and national human rights law. While a human rights framework indeed offers a powerful rationale and at times compelling reasons why states ought to afford a legal status to irregular migrants, I argue that a human rights based approach must always be complemented by pragmatic considerations, as a human rights based justification of regularisation alone will be insufficient to find adequate responses to the changing presence of irregular migrants in the EU, not all of which can invoke human rights based claims to residence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document