05 July 2024
Beyond Protection
Whether and how gender-related violence can constitute a ground to claim and receive asylum has long been a subject of debate in refugee law. While feminist legal scholars have long sought to alleviate the gender-blindness of the original text of the Refugee Convention, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) only started taking some steps in this direction earlier this year. The CJEU determined in K, L, that women or specific groups of women who share a belief in an additional common characteristic — such as a belief in gender equality — may be regarded as members of a ‘particular social group’ (PSG), making them eligible for refugee status. Continue reading >>
0 
13 July 2017
Family Life Temporarily not Available – Bilateral Limits on Family Unity within the Dublin-System
Germany and Greece bilaterally agreed upon slowing down the family reunification procedures of asylum seekers under the Dublin III Regulation. Now, many doubts and questions surround the exact terms and conditions of the agreement. Who bears the responsibility of delayed transfers? And what can be done to prevent families from being separated longer than legally permitted? Continue reading >>
0
28 June 2017
Normality and Exception: The Advocate General’s Opinion in A.S. and Jafari
On 8 June 2017, Advocate General Eleanor Sharpston delivered her Opinion in a case that goes to the core of what (infamously) came to be known as ‘refugee crisis’. On a broader, more systemic, level, the Opinion could be read as a history of the present bringing to the fore issues of geographical hierarchies and injustice and solidarity inscribed into the structure of EU law. Continue reading >>31 January 2017
“A Terrible Signal that International Law can be Flaunted without Consequence”
If refugees are detained or turned away for reasons of religion or country of origin, that is a case of discrimination clearly prohibited by international refugee law. In theory any other state party to the Refugee Protocol can take the US to the International Court of Justice. Will Chancellor Merkel or perhaps Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau – each of whom has spoken up for refugees in the current context – have the courage to make that referral? Continue reading >>12 March 2016
Taking refugee rights seriously: A reply to Professor Hailbronner
Reactions to the proposed “refugee swap” between the EU and Turkey have been predictably absolutist. On the one hand, most advocates have opposed the draft arrangement, asserting some combination of the right of refugees to be protected where they choose and/or that a protection swap would clearly breach the ECHR’s prohibition of “collective expulsion” of aliens. On the other hand, Professor Hailbronner argues against any right of refugees to make their own decisions about how to access protection, believes that refugees may be penalized if arriving in the EU “without the necessary documents,” suggests that it does not matter that Turkey is not relevantly a party to the Refugee Convention, and confidently asserts that there is no basis to see the prohibition of “collective expulsion” as engaged here. As usual, the truth is somewhere in the middle. Continue reading >>
0
11 March 2016
Legal Requirements for the EU-Turkey Refugee Agreement: A Reply to J. Hathaway
There are many open questions and objections against the EU-Turkey deal on an agreement whose details are yet to be negotiated to manage the Syrian refugee crisis. In particular on the reciprocity part: could the agreement as an easily available tool by Turkey to blackmail visa liberalization and progress in the EU Accession negotiations? How will the EU make sure the proper treatment of all returnees? How is the resettlement of refugees from Syria to the EU (and to Germany) going to take place? James Hathaway on this blog has listed three legal requirements for the agreement to be legal. In my view none of these are likely to block an agreement. Continue reading >>09 March 2016
Why the EU-Turkey Deal is Legal and a Step in the Right Direction
Pro-refugee NGOs were quick to castigate the EU-Turkey refugee 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. The critique highlights a number of valid concerns, but these caveats do not unmake the legal and conceptual value of the approach pursued by the EU: mass-influx scenarios require international cooperation. Continue reading >>09 March 2016
Three legal requirements for the EU-Turkey deal: An interview with JAMES HATHAWAY
"The right to decide where to seek recognition of refugee status does not entail the right to choose where international refugee protection is to be enjoyed": One of the foremost experts in international refugee law, James C. Hathaway (Michigan), gives some preliminary indications on the legality of the emerging EU-Turkey agreement on Syrian refugee resettlement. Continue reading >>
0
08 March 2016