{"title":"欧盟的实地武装力量和有效的司法保护,防止 Frontex 的行动权力回流:T-600/21 号案件的教训","authors":"Galina Cornelisse","doi":"10.1163/15718166-12340184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article comments on Case T-600/21 to highlight the serious shortcomings in direct actions before EU courts against allegations of fundamental rights violations by Frontex. It contributes to existing scholarship on legal accountability failings with regard to operational activities by Frontex for two reasons. First, the contribution argues that Frontex’s operational competences in the area of return are clearly circumscribed, not only by the Regulation on the European Border and Coast Guard and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, but also by crucial substantive and procedural safeguards contained in the Return Directive. Secondly, the article proposes a number of changes to current remedies against executive action of Frontex, in particular with regard to evidentiary requirements and the qualification of the EU conduct amenable to review. It argues that Article 47 of Charter, as interpreted by the Court of Justice itself, puts that same court under a clear and unequivocal obligation to adapt its own procedures accordingly in order to protect the very core of the right to effective judicial protection, namely access to courts.</p>","PeriodicalId":51819,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Migration and Law","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EU Boots on the Ground and Effective Judicial Protection against Frontex’s Operational Powers in Return: Lessons from Case T‑600/21\",\"authors\":\"Galina Cornelisse\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718166-12340184\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This article comments on Case T-600/21 to highlight the serious shortcomings in direct actions before EU courts against allegations of fundamental rights violations by Frontex. It contributes to existing scholarship on legal accountability failings with regard to operational activities by Frontex for two reasons. First, the contribution argues that Frontex’s operational competences in the area of return are clearly circumscribed, not only by the Regulation on the European Border and Coast Guard and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, but also by crucial substantive and procedural safeguards contained in the Return Directive. Secondly, the article proposes a number of changes to current remedies against executive action of Frontex, in particular with regard to evidentiary requirements and the qualification of the EU conduct amenable to review. It argues that Article 47 of Charter, as interpreted by the Court of Justice itself, puts that same court under a clear and unequivocal obligation to adapt its own procedures accordingly in order to protect the very core of the right to effective judicial protection, namely access to courts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51819,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Migration and Law\",\"volume\":\"37 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/10.1163/15718166-12340184\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEMOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Migration and Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340184","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
EU Boots on the Ground and Effective Judicial Protection against Frontex’s Operational Powers in Return: Lessons from Case T‑600/21
This article comments on Case T-600/21 to highlight the serious shortcomings in direct actions before EU courts against allegations of fundamental rights violations by Frontex. It contributes to existing scholarship on legal accountability failings with regard to operational activities by Frontex for two reasons. First, the contribution argues that Frontex’s operational competences in the area of return are clearly circumscribed, not only by the Regulation on the European Border and Coast Guard and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, but also by crucial substantive and procedural safeguards contained in the Return Directive. Secondly, the article proposes a number of changes to current remedies against executive action of Frontex, in particular with regard to evidentiary requirements and the qualification of the EU conduct amenable to review. It argues that Article 47 of Charter, as interpreted by the Court of Justice itself, puts that same court under a clear and unequivocal obligation to adapt its own procedures accordingly in order to protect the very core of the right to effective judicial protection, namely access to courts.
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.