Derogations in Exchange of Increased Responsibility: How Can This Fix the Broken Promise for More Solidarity in the EU?

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY European Journal of Migration and Law Pub Date : 2024-08-13 DOI:10.1163/15718166-12340182
Vasiliki Apatzidou
{"title":"Derogations in Exchange of Increased Responsibility: How Can This Fix the Broken Promise for More Solidarity in the EU?","authors":"Vasiliki Apatzidou","doi":"10.1163/15718166-12340182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The 2020 EU Pact on Migration and Asylum introduced a series of legal texts aimed at reforming the existing EU asylum policy. Following years of challenging negotiations, an agreement on the Pact was reached in December 2023 with all the texts published in the Official Journal of the EU in May 2024. This article critically discusses some provisions of three key texts within the Pact: the Asylum Procedures Regulation (<span style=\"font-variant: small-caps;\">APR</span>), the Crisis Regulation, and the Asylum and Migration Management Regulation (<span style=\"font-variant: small-caps;\">AMMR</span>). The aim is to uncover the strategic employment of derogations and exceptions to compensate external border states for their heightened responsibilities, particularly in situations of migratory pressure. The article also explores the impact of newly introduced concepts and measures, such as the ‘non-entry’ fiction and the concept of ‘adequate capacity’ in border procedures, as well as derogatory provisions in ‘crisis’ and ‘instrumentalisation’ situations. It highlights how the agreed instruments, under the guise of presenting derogations as a form of ‘solidarity’, compromise the rights of asylum seekers and fail to effectively address the increased responsibility of states at the external borders. It further argues that these measures deviate from the goal of harmonisation within the Common European Asylum System (<span style=\"font-variant: small-caps;\">CEAS</span>). The paper concludes by emphasising that the promise of achieving a fair and balanced asylum system in the EU remains unfulfilled, with an overreliance on derogations overshadowing genuine progress.</p>","PeriodicalId":51819,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Migration and Law","volume":"312 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Migration and Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340182","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The 2020 EU Pact on Migration and Asylum introduced a series of legal texts aimed at reforming the existing EU asylum policy. Following years of challenging negotiations, an agreement on the Pact was reached in December 2023 with all the texts published in the Official Journal of the EU in May 2024. This article critically discusses some provisions of three key texts within the Pact: the Asylum Procedures Regulation (APR), the Crisis Regulation, and the Asylum and Migration Management Regulation (AMMR). The aim is to uncover the strategic employment of derogations and exceptions to compensate external border states for their heightened responsibilities, particularly in situations of migratory pressure. The article also explores the impact of newly introduced concepts and measures, such as the ‘non-entry’ fiction and the concept of ‘adequate capacity’ in border procedures, as well as derogatory provisions in ‘crisis’ and ‘instrumentalisation’ situations. It highlights how the agreed instruments, under the guise of presenting derogations as a form of ‘solidarity’, compromise the rights of asylum seekers and fail to effectively address the increased responsibility of states at the external borders. It further argues that these measures deviate from the goal of harmonisation within the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). The paper concludes by emphasising that the promise of achieving a fair and balanced asylum system in the EU remains unfulfilled, with an overreliance on derogations overshadowing genuine progress.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以减免换取更多责任:欧盟如何才能实现更加团结的承诺?
2020 年欧盟移民与庇护公约》引入了一系列旨在改革现行欧盟庇护政策的法律文本。经过多年充满挑战的谈判,《公约》于 2023 年 12 月达成协议,并于 2024 年 5 月在欧盟官方公报上公布了所有文本。本文批判性地讨论了《公约》中三个关键文本的部分条款:《庇护程序条例》(APR)、《危机条例》和《庇护与移民管理条例》(AMMR)。文章旨在揭示克减和例外的战略运用,以补偿外部边界国家所承担的更大责任,尤其是在面临移民压力的情况下。文章还探讨了新引入的概念和措施的影响,如边境程序中的 "非入境 "概念和 "充分能力 "概念,以及 "危机 "和 "工具化 "情况下的减损条款。报告强调了已达成一致的文书是如何在将减损作为一种 "团结 "形式的幌子下,损害寻求庇护者的权利,并未能有效解决国家在外部边界的责任增加问题。本文进一步指出,这些措施偏离了欧洲共同庇护体系(CEAS)的协调目标。本文最后强调,在欧盟实现公平、平衡的庇护制度的承诺仍未实现,过度依赖减损措施给真正的进步蒙上了阴影。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Migration and Law is a quarterly journal on migration law and policy with specific emphasis on the European Union, the Council of Europe and migration activities within the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe. This journal differs from other migration journals by focusing on both the law and policy within the field of migration, as opposed to examining immigration and migration policies from a wholly sociological perspective. The Journal is the initiative of the Centre for Migration Law of the University of Nijmegen, in co-operation with the Brussels-based Migration Policy Group.
期刊最新文献
The ‘Border Security’ Concept in EU Law EU Boots on the Ground and Effective Judicial Protection against Frontex’s Operational Powers in Return: Lessons from Case T‑600/21 When Do Union Citizens and Their Families Have the Right to Equal Treatment on Grounds of Nationality in EU Law? The Fiction of Non-entry in European Migration Law: Its Implications on the Rights of Asylum Seekers and Irregular Migrants at European Borders Derogations in Exchange of Increased Responsibility: How Can This Fix the Broken Promise for More Solidarity in the EU?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1