Thema: Migration & Staatsangehörigkeit

Verfassungsrecht zur Staatsangehörigkeit und Migration im verfassungsrechtlichen Rahmen, verfassungsrechtliche Aspekte des Einwanderungsrechts, staatsbürgerliche Rechte und Pflichten sowie verfassungsrechtliche Regulierung der Migrationspolitik. Umfasst verfassungsrechtliche Staatsangehörigkeitskonzepte und verfassungsrechtliche Grenzen der Migrationsregulierung.

LawRules #9: We need to talk about Refugees and Migration Law

We need to talk about refugees and migration law. In discussions about these topics, refugees and migration policy are often being treated as the other of politics and policy. But the way states treat those seeking refuge and asylum on their territory is fundamentally a rule of law issue, and actually says a lot about the current state of the rule of law there: Are refugees able to enter a jurisdiction and apply for their right to asylum? Are due process obligations being observed? Do refugees have access to justice? Does the European migration law system work?

18. November 2020

, , , ,

Zwei Seiten einer Medaille

Eine erfolgreiche EU-Asylreform verlangt nicht nur, dass die Mitgliedstaaten und das Europäische Parlament sich einigen. Darüber hinaus müssen die Regeln so ausgestaltet sein, dass sie in der Praxis halbwegs funktionieren. Dies kann nur dann gelingen, wenn alle Mitgliedstaaten das Reformpaket als fair empfinden und Anreizstrukturen bestehen, damit sich Migranten und Flüchtlinge regelkonform verhalten. In der Gegenwart ist das nicht der Fall. Die EU-Asylpolitik leidet unter einem ausgeprägten Vollzugsdefizit, das sich exemplarisch bei einem Phänomen zeigt, das gerade aus deutscher Perspektive wichtig ist: die Sekundärmigration.

2. November 2020

, ,

The Global Politics of Refugee Protection and Return

Voluntary, safe and dignified return is one of the durable solutions to forced displacement and, thus, hosting states have the responsibility to provide international protection to refugees until the conditions for voluntary repatriation are met. Premature or forced return that is falling short of international standards would mean a violation of the principle of non-refoulement. Current global governance of forced displacement impeding seeking asylum, delaying resettlement, and facilitating return ends up violating the very founding principles of the international refugee regime while exposing refugees and asylum-seekers to violence and higher risks.

2. Oktober 2020

, , ,

The Burden of Being „Safe“

Cooperation on migration management has been recently characterised by a process of “informalisation”, most prominently in relation to readmission, which saw the proliferation of informal agreements of a dubious legal nature – particularly from a rule of law perspective. This expansion has been two-fold. First, the use of informal agreements has expanded from the national level to the EU level. Second, the informalisation of cooperation with third countries has extended to include not only migration and border management, but also asylum management. This post aims to analyse both expansive shifts, highlighting their impact on international responsibility sharing mechanisms and the protection of asylum seekers’ fundamental rights.

1. Oktober 2020

,

Frequent Recourse to the Principle of ›Effectiveness‹ in ECJ Asylum Jurisprudence

An empirical study of all asylum-related preliminary rulings reveals a disquieting trend: the Court has adopted an administrative, passivist role within the area. Its distinguishing features include an overzealous concern for the technicalities of the legislative instruments before it and sparse to no references to human rights instruments or values in the operative parts of the judgments. In light of the symbolic power carried by the Court’s language, this trend risks sending the wrong signal to national judicial instances; namely, that concerns for the system can legitimately trump concerns for the individuals caught in it.

1. Oktober 2020

, ,

A ›Complete‹ System of Legal Remedies?

In practice, Member States and the EU increasingly rely on informal instruments for cooperation with third countries, especially in the area of migration control, with important implications for the rule of law. The choice for informality becomes particularly problematic when it affects the legal situation of irregular migrants, including refugees because it makes it very difficult for them to challenge these instruments in front of EU courts. This blog post explores the effects of EU’s recourse to informality on the judicial protection of the rights of irregular migrants by using the EU-Turkey Statement as an example. The Statement, also known as the EU-Turkey ‘deal’, raises serious doubts as to whether the EU legal order indeed provides for the promised ‘complete’ system of legal remedies.

30. September 2020

, ,

The »Contamination« of EU Law by Informalization?

The examples in this post demonstrate that the EU is an autonomous international actor independent from its Member States, but it is tied up internally by its institutional procedures and restrained by its attributed powers. This governance system requires complex and time-consuming negotiations within the Union and with its international partners, which might end up in Court (Singapore, CETA Opinions) or delay ratification (Istanbul Convention). The EU’s painful practice concerning treaty-making (with complicated rules, extensive case law and long negotiations of often comprehensive mixed agreements) is clearly not fit for purpose in times of crisis.

29. September 2020

,

The External Dimension of EU Migration and Asylum Policy

This online symposium is being held just before the ACES-Asser conference on ‘Migration deals and their damaging effects’, which will take place online on 8-9 October. The conference and the contributions in this symposium aim to examine the legal and policy implications of the increased informalisation of the EU’s external action in the field of migration and asylum. The use of informal instruments in EU external relations is nothing new. At the same time, the increasing recourse to such instruments in the past few years has been a growing cause of concern over their potential detrimental effects on the rights of migrants and refugees, the EU’s institutional balance, the rule of law, as well as the global regime for protection of refugees.

28. September 2020

, ,

Bad Role Models

Over the past several months, there has been an increase in asylum seekers and refugees crossing the English Channel in small inflatable boats. This prompted the UK government to propose stemming arrivals with an Australian-style approach: ‘pushing back’ boats to France before they can reach British territorial waters. The UK already funds France to prevent asylum seekers leaving French territory through ‘pullback’ measures. Such pushback and pullback practices likely violate several international refugee, human rights and law of the sea obligations.

25. September 2020

, , ,

Mehr Schein als Sein?

In den letzten Jahren wurde viel über die schlechten Lebensstandards auf den griechischen Inseln und die notorische Ineffektivität der Dublin-Verfahren berichtet. Dies nährte die Hoffnung, dass die Veröffentlichung des zuletzt mehrfach verschobenen „neuen“ Migrations- und Asylpakts einen „Neuanfang“ wagt, den die Pressemitteilung der Kommission vollmundig versprach. Ein genauer Blick auf die Gesetzgebungsvorschläge und Empfehlungen zeigt allerdings, dass der wortreich beschworene Neuanfang unvollständig bleibt.

24. September 2020

, , ,