{"title":"¿Sistema de cuotas y/o patrocinio privado? La acogida de las personas refugiadas en UE y Canadá","authors":"Encarnación La Spina","doi":"10.24241/anuariocidobinmi.2019.220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"espanolLa mal llamada «crisis de los refugiados» en 2015 puso de manifiesto la magnitud de las limitaciones estructurales de la politica europea de asilo y sus deficits con vistas a construir un sistema de acogida mas acorde con el deber de solidaridad del articulo 78.2 y 80 del TFUE. Si bien la UE tomo medidas excepcionales para la reubicacion y el reasentamiento de personas refugiadas, la escasa voluntad de los estados miembros en asumir sus obligaciones ha cuestionado el alcance real de la solidaridad. Este articulo plantea una revision critica sobre el sistema de cuotas para el reasentamiento en la UE y Espana, frente al modelo canadiense de programas de patrocinio privado. Para ello, analiza sus puntos debiles y fuertes, asi como sus posibles factoresde convergencia con los estandares internacionales de proteccion exigibles. EnglishThe misnamed “refugee crisis” of 2015 laid bare the extent of the structural limitations of European asylum policy and its deficiencies in terms of building a reception system more in line with the duty of solidarity established in articles 78.2 and 80 of the TFEU. While the EU took exceptional measures for the relocation and resettlement of refugees, member states’ reluctance to meet their obligations has called into question the real extent of that solidarity. This paper makes a critical review of the quota system for resettlement in the EU and Spain, drawing comparisons with theCanadian model of private sponsorship programmes. To do this, it analyses its weaknesses and strengths, as well as its possible points of convergence with the applicable international standards of protection. >> The full text articles of this issue are available only in Spanish language","PeriodicalId":41670,"journal":{"name":"Anuario CIDOB de la Inmigracion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anuario CIDOB de la Inmigracion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24241/anuariocidobinmi.2019.220","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
espanolLa mal llamada «crisis de los refugiados» en 2015 puso de manifiesto la magnitud de las limitaciones estructurales de la politica europea de asilo y sus deficits con vistas a construir un sistema de acogida mas acorde con el deber de solidaridad del articulo 78.2 y 80 del TFUE. Si bien la UE tomo medidas excepcionales para la reubicacion y el reasentamiento de personas refugiadas, la escasa voluntad de los estados miembros en asumir sus obligaciones ha cuestionado el alcance real de la solidaridad. Este articulo plantea una revision critica sobre el sistema de cuotas para el reasentamiento en la UE y Espana, frente al modelo canadiense de programas de patrocinio privado. Para ello, analiza sus puntos debiles y fuertes, asi como sus posibles factoresde convergencia con los estandares internacionales de proteccion exigibles. EnglishThe misnamed “refugee crisis” of 2015 laid bare the extent of the structural limitations of European asylum policy and its deficiencies in terms of building a reception system more in line with the duty of solidarity established in articles 78.2 and 80 of the TFEU. While the EU took exceptional measures for the relocation and resettlement of refugees, member states’ reluctance to meet their obligations has called into question the real extent of that solidarity. This paper makes a critical review of the quota system for resettlement in the EU and Spain, drawing comparisons with theCanadian model of private sponsorship programmes. To do this, it analyses its weaknesses and strengths, as well as its possible points of convergence with the applicable international standards of protection. >> The full text articles of this issue are available only in Spanish language