Search

In 2015, the movement of asylum seekers to the European Union (EU) increased dramatically and led to the factual invalidation of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). From the beginning, the European Commission's objective was to create a fair system guaranteeing a European-wide protection status in line with the standards contained in the 1951 Refugee Convention. In order to understand why this system failed, it is important to look closely at the applicable laws. Which regulations were based on the Amsterdam and Lisbon treaty mandates? What were the key disputes and which normative solution was pushed through? Scholarly attention so far has focused on either external aspects of border policy or institutional and policy issues within the EU. By contrast, this article argues that the central gaps in the system present a multifaceted set of problems with three main weaknesses: the neglected geographic asymmetry enshrined in the European asylum system; a reliance on national standards that runs through all the legislative processes; and the over-emphasis of asylum rights in contrast to an under-regulation of access to asylum. This combination of problems helps to explain the rise of a serious protection crisis in Europe following the influx in 2015, a crisis that remains largely unresolved. These inherent weaknesses are analysed through an examination of key disputes in the legislative process establishing the CEAS. The article traces the different positions of the European institutions in the legislation process and assesses the shortcomings of the emergent system in two periods: during the establishment of this system from 1999 to 2005, and the reform period from 2008 to 2013. The article concludes with reflections on the current reform phase. The findings point to ineffective laws, unresolved normative disputes, and the need for further reforms to achieve a harmonized CEAS in line with treaty mandates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The officers of the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) play pivotal roles at various stages in Canada's refugee system, making decisions that are life-changing for asylum seekers. This article examines the evolving institutional setting and processes that define the CBSA's enforcement policy and its consequences for asylum seekers in Canada. Drawing on the findings of field-research, conducted between October 2015 and May 2018 in three Canadian provinces (Ontario, British Columbia, and Quebec), it argues that the Agency operates in a specific social universe heavily shaped by the post-9/11 geopolitical context of the criminalization of migration. This situation has been exacerbated by the major overhaul of Canada's refugee system, undertaken by the previous Conservative government in 2012. The article further contends that the way the CBSA has been involved in refugee status determination turns Canada's refugee system into an adversarial and unfair process for some groups of asylum seekers. To that end, it highlights the CBSA's policies in three areas: eligibility determination, front-end security screening of refugee claimants, and ministerial interventions at the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2012, Australia reintroduced arrangements for 'offshore processing' in the Pacific, which forcibly transferred asylum seekers arriving by boat to the Republic of Nauru and Papua New Guinea (PNG), purportedly for refugee status determination (RSD). Previous studies have focused on the detention of asylum seekers transferred to these States in 'regional processing centres' (RPCs). This article instead provides a factual foundation for more current inquiries into the content and scope of each State's protection obligations under international law, which have increased in importance since the end of closed detention in the RPCs in 2015 and 2017. The formal legal and diplomatic arrangements established in and between the three States for the transfer of asylum seekers; processing of their claims; and provision of durable solutions will be examined, with reference to the minimum standards required. The article identifies a protection deficit in the legal architecture and bilateral arrangements underpinning offshore processing. Since their inception, the arrangements have lacked clarity regarding the respective obligations of the three States; involved transfers even in the absence of fair and efficient procedures for RSD in Nauru and PNG; and failed to ensure timely access to appropriate outcomes for all transferees (whether determined to be in need of international protection or not). The article therefore concludes that Australia should facilitate readmission to its territory for all people in Nauru and PNG who do not have access to an appropriate alternative outcome. It also suggests that any future attempts to establish third country transfer procedures will require radically different legal and diplomatic arrangements to enhance responsibility sharing and cooperation on refugee protection, and to comply with international law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses the role of Canada's Designated Country of Origin (DCO) policy in the illegalization of asylum seekers. The policy allows the government to designate countries in which it is presumed that citizens do not face risks of persecution, torture, or similar abuse. Refugee claimants from DCOs are thus subject to accelerated processing timelines with reduced rights. Canada has implemented the policy as a way to deal with a backlog of asylum applications, increase efficiency, and exclude fraudulent refugee claims. Based on a primary field research conducted between October 2015 and May 2017 in three provinces, Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia, this article argues that the DCO policy is likely to have the unintended effect of shifting asylum seekers into an irregular status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses the Italian policies towards immigration, with a particular focus on the Minniti Law regarding the treatment of asylum seekers. The author comments on the migrant crisis originating in Africa and the Middle East as a result of the Arab Spring uprisings of 2011, which caused an influx of asylum-seekers in Europe.

The article examines how Model International Mobility Convention (MIMC) can play a larger role in the international refugee regime concerning economically motivated migrants. Topics discussed include International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers; MMIC and Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; right of freedom of movement within the asylum State; and ways in which MIMC develops a comprehensive and rights-based framework for refugees.

The article examines how Model International Mobility Convention (MIMC) can play a larger role in the international refugee regime and socioeconomic issues. Topics discussed include International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers; legal regime supported by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; right of freedom of movement within the asylum State; and ways in which MIMC develops a comprehensive and rights-based framework for refugees.

The article examines how Model International Mobility Convention (MIMC) can play a larger role in the international refugee regime and socioeconomic issues. Topics discussed include International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers; legal regime supported by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; right of freedom of movement within the asylum State; and ways in which MIMC develops a comprehensive and rights-based framework for refugees.

The article examines how mobility can play a larger role in the international refugee regime and explains Model International Mobility Convention (MIMC). Topics discussed include International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers; legal regime supported by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; right of freedom of movement within the asylum State; and ways in which MIMC develops a comprehensive and rights-based framework for refugees.

The article examines how mobility can play a larger role in the international refugee regime and explains Model International Mobility Convention (MIMC). Topics discussed include International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers; legal regime supported by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; right of freedom of movement within the asylum State; and ways in which MIMC develops a comprehensive and rights-based framework for refugees.

The article argues that mobility can and should play a larger role in the international refugee regime and explains Model International Mobility Convention (MIMC). Topics discussed include legal regime supported by the mandate and competency of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR); right of freedom of movement within the asylum State; and ways in which MIMC develops a comprehensive and rights-based framework for individuals on the move.

The article argues that mobility can and should play a larger role in the international refugee regime and explains Model International Mobility Convention (MIMC). Topics discussed include legal regime supported by the mandate and competency of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR); right of freedom of movement within the asylum State; and ways in which MIMC develops a comprehensive and rights-based framework for individuals on the move.

The article argues that mobility can and should play a larger role in the international refugee regime than is usually recognized. Topics discussed include legal regime supported by the mandate and competency of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR); right of freedom of movement within the asylum State; and ways in which Model International Mobility Convention (MIMC) develops a comprehensive and rights-based framework for individuals on the move.

The article argues that mobility can and should play a larger role in the international refugee regime than is usually recognized. Topics discussed include idea of providing opportunities for refugees to move no longer figures in the refugee regime; right of freedom of movement within the asylum State; and ways in which Model International Mobility Convention (MIMC) develops a comprehensive and rights-based framework for individuals on the move.

Traditionally, differences in states' refugee protection contributions have been attributed to the variation in countries' structural pull-factors such as their geographic location. However, policy choices, such as Germany's decision to open its borders for Syrian refugees in 2015, can also have a significant impact on the number of arrivals and constitute a puzzle that traditional approaches struggle to explain. This paper demonstrates that viewing refugee burden-sharing through the lens of public goods theory can provide significant insights about refugee protection dynamics in the EU, in particular in the context of a sudden mass influx of migrants that threatens internal security. By highlighting how free-riding and burden-shifting dynamics can undermine the provision of collective goods during a refugee crisis, a public goods approach can advance our understanding of why countries sometimes accept disproportionate responsibilities for forced migrants and how the effectiveness of EU refugee burden-sharing instruments can, and should, be strengthened. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Building on Moravcsik's Liberal Intergovernmentalism, I offer an explanation of the non-decision on permanent EU refugee quotas. Some traditionally influential Member States in EU asylum politics, such as Germany, Austria and Sweden, received large numbers of refugees and faced strong domestic pressures to engage other Member States in responsibility-sharing. Yet, governments of Member States with small application numbers (among whom several Eastern European governments were particularly vocal) had incentives to undercut responsibility-sharing to avoid similar pressures. Having a better alternative to the potentially negotiated agreement, these governments successfully blocked the introduction of permanent refugee quotas. Besides explaining the absence of an effective response to one of the root causes of the asylum crisis (unequal strains) through asymmetrical interdependence, the article further develops Liberal Intergovernmentalist arguments and shows how national electorates influence positions taken by governments at the EU level when they are mobilized by right-wing populist parties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports that Asylum seeking is being considered to been seen as a security issues rather than a human rights and asylum seekers have come to be considered as agroup of people whom the natives need to be protected from, rather than as been seen as people in need of protection. The views of people of Sweden and the policy of the government is discussed.

The article reports the decision of the High Court of Australia in the case "PlaintiffM68/2015 v. Minister for Immigration and Border Protection." It reports that in the case the court upheld Australia's controversial practice of interdicting and transferring asylum seekers to third countries for the processing of their claims.

One of the key problems at the heart of refugee protection today is that there are large numbers of refugees attempting to seek asylum and insufficient political will in many asylum-host states to receive refugees in their territories. A proportion of these attempt to come to Australia to seek refuge – either by requesting a resettlement place through the auspices of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, or by arriving directly in Australian territory (by boat or plane). Asylum-seekers who arrive by boat are disadvantaged and penalised under Australian law in that they are excluded from Australian territory and processed offshore in third countries. Successive Australian governments justify these measures by emphasising that resettlement is the ‘proper’ mode for claiming asylum which ensures protection is given to those refugees who are most in need. This raises fundamental ethical questions: are those chosen by resettlement countries such as Australia necessarily the refugees who are most in need? Is resettlement as a concept ethical? And should resettlement be utilised to prevent and penalise spontaneous arrivals attempting to seek asylum in a country? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although it's been nearly five years since the war began in Syria, it wasn't until a year ago that the countries parties of the European Union and the European media have begun to give importance to this humanitarian crisis, especially since the pictures of the little Aylan's body lying on the beach appeared on the media. This had the effect that the countries of the European Union finally sat down to negotiate a quota system to host a part of the refugees from Syria, which today is still pending final approval. Meanwhile, many expressions of racism and xenophobia have been taking place in the member countries of the European Union. These are being exploited by the conservative parties to exploit the fear of citizenship to an alleged Islamization of the territory, and few are the voices claiming economic and cultural advantages of this hosting, besides of the obligations arising from treaties of International Law which have been signed by the member countries and the European Union itsel. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since 1999 the EU has adopted a series of legal instruments to establish a Common European Asylum System to harmonize legislation on reception systems and asylum procedures. On 13 May 2015 the European Commission presented a European Agenda for Migration including a new regulation proposal of the European Parliament and Council from Directive 2013/32 / EU on safe countries of origin list. The new EU regulatory framework for international protection was published on 29 June 2013. The Spanish legal framework for international protection present deficiencies in relation to the transposition of European Directives. The analysis of national statistical data show the low percentage of applications in Spain comparing to other MS of the European Union. It is important to underline the weaknesses of the Spanish asylum system and to develop proposals regarding the measures to be developed in order solve these difficulties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article investigates the Australian asylum seeker Code of Behaviour, which commenced operation in December 2013. Topics discussed include negative impact of the Code on the lives of asylum seekers; absence of procedural fairness guarantees; and history and genesis of the Code. It also discusses the Code's enforcement and operation and practical and rhetorical impact of the Code.

The article focuses on the responsibility of the Australian public to watch the implementation of Australian Government's offshore asylum seeker policy. Topics discussed include Australian government's policy of processing asylum seekers offshore, the political power of Australian people and accountability for government actions and issues related to public access to offshore detention centres.

El artículo discurre sobre las normas y directivas de la Comisión Europa promulgadas en 2008 para establecer estándares para la recepción de solicitantes de asilo. El autor comenta sobre el proceso de la detención de los inmigrantes y los refugiados y examina los métodos involucrados para protegerles.

The article reports failure of the Australian government policies particularly the 'no-advantage' policy for asylum seekers with reference to fundamental human rights principles according to an inquiry by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights.

Se informa que el número de desplazado internos en Colombia debido al conflicto armado entre el gobierno, los paramilitares y la guerrilla está en auge, mientras que las políticas diseñadas para prevenir y remediar el desplazamiento no se aplican. Se nota que en 2007 se registraron a 270.000 desplazados nuevos.