18 October 2024
Taking Back Control?
This week, the Polish government unveiled its new migration strategy which lays out a proposal that, “in the event of a threat to destabilize the country by an influx of immigrants, it should be possible to temporarily and territorially suspend the right to accept asylum applications.” This blog argues that the proposal is not only unlawful but also poses a threat to the common European asylum system. This is so especially in light of the upcoming implementation of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum, a set of new rules managing migration and establishing a common asylum system at EU level. Continue reading >>
3 
31 July 2024
Humanitarian Visas for International Protection Purposes
When feasible, third-country nationals request within EU Member States’ diplomatic or consular representations a visa on the basis of their need of international protection, in order to be granted legal access to the issuing State’s territory precisely to apply for international protection upon arrival. The focal point is whether States can be required to issue these visas in order to comply with their human rights obligations. This contribution demonstrates that the European Court of Human Rights holding that States do not hold any obligation in the context of humanitarian visa proceedings is unconvincing. Continue reading >>
0
14 May 2024
Bend it like Britain?
After months of parliamentary ping-pong, the UK Parliament passed the “Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act” in late April. Not even two weeks later, 66 persons were detained to be deported to Rwanda, and the FDA launched an unprecedented legal action before the High Court, claiming the Act conflicts with the Civil Service Code obligation to “uphold the rule of law and administration of justice.” By seeking to avoid the prohibition of refoulement, the Act undermines both core principles of the rule of law and disapplies fundamental human rights protections. This blog post discusses key provisions of the new Act, the concerns they raise and some remaining avenues for legal challenges. Continue reading >>02 April 2024
Refoulement As A Crime
Last month, the Italian Court of Cassation upheld the (suspended) sentence of one year’s imprisonment of the shipmaster of the Italian ship Asso28. He was convicted of two offences of abandonment for returning and handing around 100 migrants over to the personnel of a Libyan patrol boat, including some unaccompanied minors and pregnant women, whom he had previously rescued in international waters within the Libyan SAR zone. The case constitutes the first time an individual was held criminally responsible for failing to fulfil the duty of non-refoulement. Until recently, the refoulement duty has only served to exclude the liability of shipmasters who had complied with it whenever they were accused of facilitating irregular immigration. This case indicates the emergence of a new function of the principle, namely that of grounding the criminal liability of those who violate it. Continue reading >>29 February 2024
When Treaties are Forbidden
A few months ago the UK’s Supreme Court held that the Secretary of State’s policy to remove protection seekers to Rwanda to have their claims determined there was unlawful. The British government responded to this decision with a Treaty and Bill that seek to legislate the fiction, or indeed, the falsehood, of Rwanda’s safety. This move demonstrates the fragility of the rule of law, both domestically and internationally. Addressing the latter, this essay shifts focus from domestic challenges to international ones, exploring whether STCs could be contested as ‘forbidden treaties’. Continue reading >>
0
30 January 2024
Shielding Frontex 2.0
In Hamoudi v Frontex, the General Court dismissed another action that could have clarified if, when, and how independent or joint human rights responsibility would arise when Frontex is engaged in shared operational conduct with the Member States. This time not on the basis of an obscure re-interpretation of the Applicant’s claim, but instead, on the basis of an unattainably high and unrealistic burden, standard and method of proof. In doing so, the General Court again eschews from clarifying the nature, conditions and consequences of both independent and joint human rights responsibility of Frontex. Taken together, these cases raise the question whether there are any viable forms of judicial recourse for fundamental rights violations committed or contributed to by the EU’s Border and Coastguard Agency. Continue reading >>
0
18 January 2024
Leading the Way
There is little doubt that climate change in all its facets is one of the most pressing global issues of our time. Increasingly, we see international and regional treaty bodies addressing it. Much has been written about ongoing procedures in front of the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). However, other regional developments, such as the African Commission’s study on the impact of climate change or the request for an advisory opinion on the climate emergency to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) have regrettably received less attention. As we have submitted an amicus curiae to the latter proceeding, we want to contribute to its prominence and present the core arguments of our intervention to the Court. In particular, we highlight the nexus between climate change and forced displacement from a complementary protection perspective. Continue reading >>
0
01 December 2023
A Borderline Case
On 28 November 2023, Finland decided to close all its land border crossing stations to Russia due to the latter's apparent instrumentalization of migrants. That a foreign power, which conducts war elsewhere in Europe, directly engages in unfriendly acts against the EU’s (as well as NATO’s) eastern flank highlights the issues of national security involved. The situation is part of a broader European dilemma but presents certain idiosyncracies. How is an EU Member State such as Finland, respectful of the rule of law, to respond to such unfriendly acts which intrumentalize the vulnerable position of asylum seekers whose rights must, in principle, be observed at all times? This brief post addresses some of the legal issues involved in the currently unfolding situation. Continue reading >>
0
19 November 2023
Magical Thinking and Obsessive Desires
Two days before the UK Supreme Court declared the government’s Rwanda policy unlawful, PM Rishi Sunak rid himself of his Home Secretary, Suella Braverman. The sacking, the ruling, and the aftermath demonstrate both a key division in the Conservative Party and illustrate the choice it faces on the kind of politics it will promote after the next election: socially liberal technocratic nationalism (the Sunak option) or illiberal ‘culture war’ nationalism (the Braverman faction). The Supreme Court’s judgment raises the stakes in this conflict because its grounds for ruling the Rwanda Plan unlawful appear to provide ammunition for the radical illiberal wing of the Conservative Party. Continue reading >>
0
25 October 2023