Articles for category: AAA General

Safe for whom?

The EU’s notion of “safe countries of origin” is on increasingly shaky ground. In a recent Opinion, Advocate General de la Tour suggests that a country can still be deemed safe even when specific groups face serious threats there. This reinterpretation breaks with established case law and risks hollowing out core procedural protections for asylum seekers across Europe. It remains to be seen how this stance will influence the delicate balance between efficient processing and safeguarding fundamental rights.

15. Mai 2025

, , ,

Dobrindts Rechtsbruch

Der neue Innenminister Alexander Dobrindt hat am 7. Mai 2025 die Bundespolizei angewiesen auch Schutzsuchenden bei Binnengrenzkontrollen die Einreise basierend auf § 18 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 AsylG zu verweigern (und diese in den jeweiligen angrenzenden Staat zurückzuweisen). Damit sind die bei Schutzsuchenden verpflichtend durchzuführenden Dublin-Verfahren für diese Personengruppe faktisch ausgesetzt. Davon ausgenommen sind nur „erkennbar vulnerable Personen“, die „weiterhin an die zuständigen Stellen oder Erstaufnahmeeinrichtung weitergeleitet werden.“ Diese Aussetzung des Dublin-Verfahrens an den deutschen Binnengrenzen ist evident rechtswidrig – also ein klarer Rechtsbruch.

15. Mai 2025

, , , , , , ,

Tilting the Scales

On April 10 2025 AG Norkus delivered his Opinion in the appeal of Hamoudi v Frontex (Case C-136/24). In it, he tackles a question that is pivotal not only for Mr. Hamoudi’s right to compensation but also for the evolution of the EU legal system: how should the CJEU address stark power imbalances in evidentiary matters? In formulating EU procedural rules for cases involving collective expulsions, the CJEU should take into account the blatant asymmetry in accessing evidence existing between asylum seekers adrift at sea and an EU Agency equipped with cutting-edge surveillance technology. Yet, the reasoning of the AG on the allocation of the burden of proof misfires in some crucial respects.

15. Mai 2025

, , , ,

Law and Political Economy Beyond the State

The study of European Union Law from the perspective of Law and Political Economy (LPE) offers valuable insights from two perspectives. This post shows that on the one hand, LPE as a scholarly movement provides a critical framework for analysing fundamental legal aspects of the EU’s political economy and brings to the debate a much needed renewal of the importance of the critique of the political economy. On the other hand, investigating the EU from a perspective sensitive to LPE analysis is also a potentially enriching challenge for the scholarly movement itself.

15. Mai 2025

,

Academic Vertigo

What is therefore needed is a much thicker description of the current phase of semantic destabilization. This implies to build a new questionnaire able to grasp the dynamics of contemporary legal controversies allowing to bring historical depth and socio-legal […] While there is certainly a large variety of methodologies able to address this questionnaire, […] I contend however that a socio-genetic approach is better equipped when it comes to unpack the notion of “context” and reconstitute the complex “hermeneutic space” of legal concepts that continuously move back and forth from the legal and the political fields.

14. Mai 2025

, , ,

The Dark Side of Humor

On March 3, 2025, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) released its final judgment in Yevstifeyev and others v. Russia. The decision concerned two applications against the Russian government, claiming that the domestic authorities had failed to comply with their obligation to “respond adequately” to homophobic messages and thus violated the applicants’ right to private life under Articles 8 and 14 of the Convention. This ruling offers an excellent illustration of the Court’s flawed understanding of the role of humor and satire in the protection of free speech.

14. Mai 2025

, ,

Just Asking

Have you ever wondered why a legal text is the way it is, or whether its implementation actually works as intended? Typically, one would approach such questions by consulting existing textual material. If one is extraordinary inquisitive, one might even file access-to-document requests. However, sometimes one cannot escape the feeling that something is missing. In that situation, I suggest, one should do the obvious: talk to people who know better – ideally, the people working on or embodying the phenomenon one intends to research.

12. Mai 2025

, , , ,

Glancing Beyond Europe

On 9 May 1831, a young French aristocrat trained as lawyer arrived in Rhode Island for a nine-months visit to the United States. Officially tasked by the French government with studying the American prison system, his ambition and desire for political and literary fame propelled him to conduct a much broader study of the character of the American Republic. Based on his observations, the young lawyer wrote Democracy in America; a book that holds as much insight about the European Union today as it did about the early American Republic back then.

12. Mai 2025

, ,

The Nationality Lottery

On 24 March 2025, the Amsterdam District Court issued a consequential judgement on deprivation of nationality after a terrorist conviction. The ruling stated that the Dutch government could not revoke the nationality of a person convicted of terrorism-related crimes, declaring it a violation of the prohibition of discrimination based on ethnic origin. The judgement marks a departure from previous case law established by the Council of State – the highest administrative court in the Netherlands – as it reconceptualizes the issue of deprivation of nationality as one of direct discrimination based on ethnic origin. However, it fails to provide a clear explanation for its reasoning and seems to conflate nationality with ethnicity.

12. Mai 2025

, , , , , ,