贸易法背景下的欧盟-约旦契约:优先进入欧盟市场以使难民留在该地区

M. Panizzon
{"title":"贸易法背景下的欧盟-约旦契约:优先进入欧盟市场以使难民留在该地区","authors":"M. Panizzon","doi":"10.4337/9781788972482.00020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the wake of the EU’s 2015/16 refugee crisis issue-linkage has made a comeback in the form of the EU Compacts. In an updated version of trade conditionality, the EU-Jordan Compact links refugee employment to a duty-free and quota-free (DFQF) preference under the EU Everything-but-Arms (EBA) for goods produced with up to 25% of refugee labor. The rationale underlying this ‘new approach’ to refugee protection, relates back to Migration Partnership Framework and the Global Compacts’ vision to operationalize the ‘multidimensional reality’ of migration and flight, including by linking refugee protection to non-refugee specific policies, including the EU’s Trade-for-All strategy of ‘value-based’ trade. Yet, precisely the link to trade informing this shift away from resettlement towards one of creating livelihood opportunities for refugees to remain in the region requires adjustments, which are so country-specific that they might infringe on the WTO’s special and differential treatment (SDT). The research question informing this chapter is under which conditions, the EU’s Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) under the WTO Enabling Clause which justifies trade preferences for ‘vulnerable developing countries’ can be used to compensate first-safe countries for their exceptionally important intakes of refugees. Without clear criteria to justify why, when and which EU neighbourhood country deserve a more favourable treatment than other ‘particularly affected’ ones, similarly situated countries could have a claim under the WTO’s EC-Tariff Treatment interpretation of the WTO SDT. Such legal creativity, even if justified by a time-limited ‘crisis’ narrative, raises claims under WTO law. The focus of this chapter is laid on the legitimacy of the EU-Jordan Compact under WTO law and its congruence with the EU Neighbourhood Policy. To bypass such concerns, and to prevent tertiary educated refugees from being held hostage in the export-oriented garment industry, we suggest adding a trade-in-services dimension to the export-based refugee employment program, by linking EU service provision in Jordan’s humanitarian infrastructure to Syrian employment in these sectors.","PeriodicalId":121075,"journal":{"name":"Constitutionalising the External Dimensions of EU Migration Policies in Times of Crisis","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The EU-Jordan compact in a trade law context: preferential access to the EU market to Keep Refugees in the Region\",\"authors\":\"M. Panizzon\",\"doi\":\"10.4337/9781788972482.00020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the wake of the EU’s 2015/16 refugee crisis issue-linkage has made a comeback in the form of the EU Compacts. In an updated version of trade conditionality, the EU-Jordan Compact links refugee employment to a duty-free and quota-free (DFQF) preference under the EU Everything-but-Arms (EBA) for goods produced with up to 25% of refugee labor. The rationale underlying this ‘new approach’ to refugee protection, relates back to Migration Partnership Framework and the Global Compacts’ vision to operationalize the ‘multidimensional reality’ of migration and flight, including by linking refugee protection to non-refugee specific policies, including the EU’s Trade-for-All strategy of ‘value-based’ trade. Yet, precisely the link to trade informing this shift away from resettlement towards one of creating livelihood opportunities for refugees to remain in the region requires adjustments, which are so country-specific that they might infringe on the WTO’s special and differential treatment (SDT). The research question informing this chapter is under which conditions, the EU’s Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) under the WTO Enabling Clause which justifies trade preferences for ‘vulnerable developing countries’ can be used to compensate first-safe countries for their exceptionally important intakes of refugees. Without clear criteria to justify why, when and which EU neighbourhood country deserve a more favourable treatment than other ‘particularly affected’ ones, similarly situated countries could have a claim under the WTO’s EC-Tariff Treatment interpretation of the WTO SDT. Such legal creativity, even if justified by a time-limited ‘crisis’ narrative, raises claims under WTO law. The focus of this chapter is laid on the legitimacy of the EU-Jordan Compact under WTO law and its congruence with the EU Neighbourhood Policy. To bypass such concerns, and to prevent tertiary educated refugees from being held hostage in the export-oriented garment industry, we suggest adding a trade-in-services dimension to the export-based refugee employment program, by linking EU service provision in Jordan’s humanitarian infrastructure to Syrian employment in these sectors.\",\"PeriodicalId\":121075,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Constitutionalising the External Dimensions of EU Migration Policies in Times of Crisis\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Constitutionalising the External Dimensions of EU Migration Policies in Times of Crisis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788972482.00020\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Constitutionalising the External Dimensions of EU Migration Policies in Times of Crisis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788972482.00020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在欧盟2015/16年难民危机之后,问题联系又以欧盟契约的形式卷土重来。在贸易条件的更新版本中,欧盟-约旦契约将难民就业与欧盟除武器外的一切(EBA)下的免税和免配额(DFQF)优惠联系起来,该优惠适用于使用高达25%的难民劳动力生产的商品。这种难民保护“新方法”的基本原理与《移民伙伴关系框架》和《全球契约》的愿景有关,即实现移民和逃离的“多维现实”,包括将难民保护与非难民具体政策联系起来,包括欧盟的“基于价值的”贸易“全民贸易”战略。然而,从重新安置到为留在该地区的难民创造生计机会的转变,正是与贸易之间的联系需要调整,这些调整因国家而异,可能会违反世贸组织的特殊与差别待遇(SDT)。本章的研究问题是,在什么条件下,欧盟的普惠制(GSP)在世贸组织授权条款下证明了“脆弱的发展中国家”的贸易优惠,可以用来补偿第一安全国家对难民的特别重要的吸收。如果没有明确的标准来证明为什么、何时以及哪个欧盟邻国应该比其他“特别受影响”的国家获得更优惠的待遇,处境类似的国家可以根据WTO对WTO SDT的欧盟关税待遇解释提出索赔。这种法律上的创造性,即使有时间限制的“危机”叙事,也会引发世贸组织法律下的索赔。本章的重点是在WTO法律下欧盟-约旦契约的合法性及其与欧盟邻国政策的一致性。为了绕过这些担忧,并防止受过高等教育的难民在出口导向型服装行业被扣为人质,我们建议在出口导向型难民就业计划中增加服务贸易维度,将欧盟在约旦人道主义基础设施中的服务提供与叙利亚在这些部门的就业联系起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The EU-Jordan compact in a trade law context: preferential access to the EU market to Keep Refugees in the Region
In the wake of the EU’s 2015/16 refugee crisis issue-linkage has made a comeback in the form of the EU Compacts. In an updated version of trade conditionality, the EU-Jordan Compact links refugee employment to a duty-free and quota-free (DFQF) preference under the EU Everything-but-Arms (EBA) for goods produced with up to 25% of refugee labor. The rationale underlying this ‘new approach’ to refugee protection, relates back to Migration Partnership Framework and the Global Compacts’ vision to operationalize the ‘multidimensional reality’ of migration and flight, including by linking refugee protection to non-refugee specific policies, including the EU’s Trade-for-All strategy of ‘value-based’ trade. Yet, precisely the link to trade informing this shift away from resettlement towards one of creating livelihood opportunities for refugees to remain in the region requires adjustments, which are so country-specific that they might infringe on the WTO’s special and differential treatment (SDT). The research question informing this chapter is under which conditions, the EU’s Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) under the WTO Enabling Clause which justifies trade preferences for ‘vulnerable developing countries’ can be used to compensate first-safe countries for their exceptionally important intakes of refugees. Without clear criteria to justify why, when and which EU neighbourhood country deserve a more favourable treatment than other ‘particularly affected’ ones, similarly situated countries could have a claim under the WTO’s EC-Tariff Treatment interpretation of the WTO SDT. Such legal creativity, even if justified by a time-limited ‘crisis’ narrative, raises claims under WTO law. The focus of this chapter is laid on the legitimacy of the EU-Jordan Compact under WTO law and its congruence with the EU Neighbourhood Policy. To bypass such concerns, and to prevent tertiary educated refugees from being held hostage in the export-oriented garment industry, we suggest adding a trade-in-services dimension to the export-based refugee employment program, by linking EU service provision in Jordan’s humanitarian infrastructure to Syrian employment in these sectors.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The EU-Turkey statement: legal nature and compatibility with EU institutional law Transformation or continuity? EU external migration policy in the aftermath of the migration crisis Migration deals and responsibility sharing: can the two go together? The EUs readmission policy: of agreements and arrangements The EU-Turkey deal: reversing Lisbonisation in EU migration and asylum policies
×
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