scholarly journals The European Union and Migration: An Interplay of National, Regional, and International Law

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 111 ◽  
pp. 509-513
Author(s):  
Iris Goldner Lang
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Global Migration ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Law ◽  
Migration Law ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Third Country Nationals

If global migration law “includes all levels of the law,” then the European Union represents the most developed instance of the interplay of national, regional, and international law. Migration law in the European Union involves the interaction of EU Member States’ national laws, EU regional law, and international law. This complex interchange of different migratory legal regimes is the consequence of diverse, and sometimes conflicting, objectives and interests of the Union and its Member States, and the nature of EU law itself. This essay explores the impact of these three levels of the law on the four migratory regulatory categories—EU citizens, “desirable” third-country nationals, asylum seekers, and all other third-country nationals—and the three objectives associated with these categories. The predominance of one legal regime over another varies depending on the regulatory category of migrants and the objectives associated therewith. While describing the existing legal systems, the essay outlines their attributes and shortcomings, the most prominent being: a clear rift between the rights granted to EU citizens and to third-country nationals; EU Member States’ determination to reserve to their respective national territories a high level of national control over labor migration; and significant deficiencies of the EU asylum law which were brought to the surface by the recent refugee influx into the EU.

WHERE THE LAW BECOMES IRRELEVANT: CONSULAR ASSISTANCE AND THE EUROPEAN UNION

2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 965-995 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annemarieke Vermeer-Künzli
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
International Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Eu

AbstractIn recent years, the European Union (‘eu’) has taken a number of initiatives with a view to co-ordinating consular assistance in third countries. Not only have EU citizens an entitlement to consular assistance by any EU Member State in the absence of a representation of their own, but EU Member States themselves are encouraged to co-operate by means of the Lead State Concept and other forms of co-operation. While this may seem relatively unproblematic from the perspective of the EU, it is very difficult to reconcile with general international law. The various EU agreements in this area have no application to third States: some do not have legally binding form and even those that do only apply to the parties to the treaties, ie EU Member States. This article will present the situation, analyse its complexities and offer some reflections on the global application and desirability of the regime created by the EU.

scholarly journals LEGAL PROTECTION OF THIRD-COUNTRY NATIONALS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (127) ◽  
pp. 95-103
Author(s):  
N. Mushak
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Common System ◽  
Additional Protection ◽  
Eu Commission ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Common Policy ◽  
Third Country Nationals

The article is devoted to the legal analysis of the EU common policy in order to provide protection to third country nationals. To control the issues caused by a significant increase of the number of asylum seekers and refugees into the territory of the EU Member States the European Union is developing a common policy on asylum and protection of third-country nationals crossing the external borders of the EU Member States. The EU common policy in this area is the European Union coordination policy to establish common rules for asylum for third-country nationals; establish common rules to provide the additional security for third-country nationals who without obtaining the European asylum in whole, however, need the international protection; to create a common system of temporary protection for displaced persons in regard of their substantial influx; to determine common procedures for granting and withdrawing of a single asylum status or additional protection. Special attention is paid to the analysis of the asylum procedure of third-country nationals. As well as issues related to the protection of external borders, visa and immigration policies TFEU predicts a joint adoption by the European Parliament and the Council decision under the ordinary legislative procedure, id est voting for proposal of the EU Commission. Simultaneously, under the TFEU, if within one or more EU Member States there is an emergency situation characterized by a sudden influx of third-country nationals, the EU Council for the EU Commission proposal and acting after the consultations with the European Parliament may adopt temporary measures in favor of the interesting Member States. Nowadays the European Union is in dynamic and permanent development process of a common policy to provide protection to third-country nationals. This policy is implemented through the use of the EU method of coordination in matters relating to the establishment of the common status of asylum for third-country nationals; determining the status of a common additional protection for third-country nationals; the introduction of a common system of temporary protection for displaced persons; establishing of common procedures for granting and withdrawing of a common asylum status or additional protection.

scholarly journals Migration and mobility of third-country national labour workers to and inside Europe during the Covid-19 pandemic – a legal analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Adolfo Sommarribas ◽  
Birte Nienaber
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Rapid Spread ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Third Country Nationals

AbstractThe Covid-19 pandemic took most EU Member States of the European Union by surprise, as they underestimated the rapid spread of the contagion across the continent. The response of the EU Member States was asymmetrical, individualistic and significantly slow. The first measures taken were to close down the internal borders. The response of the European Union was even slower, and it was not until 17th March 2020 that the external borders were closed. These actions affected legal migration into the European Union from four perspectives: it affected 1) the mobility of those third-country nationals who were on a temporary stay in the EU Member States; 2) the entry of third-country nationals to do seasonal work; 3) legal migrants entering and staying; and 4) the status of the third-country nationals already residing in the EU Member States, especially those experiencing a loss of income. This article will deal with the measures taken by the EU Member States to manage the immigration services, as a case study how Luxembourg dealt to avoid that temporary staying migrants and regular migrants fall into irregularity. Finally, we will focus on the vulnerability of third-country nationals with the rising risk of unemployment and the risk of being returned to their country of origin. The article will also analyse access to healthcare and unemployment benefits.

The Politics of International Oversight: Strategic Monitoring and Legal Compliance in the European Union

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 (3) ◽  
pp. 429-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOSHUA C. FJELSTUL ◽  
CLIFFORD J. CARRUBBA
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Formal Model ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Compliance ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Strategic Monitoring ◽  
The Eu

States often violate international agreements, both accidentally and intentionally. To process complaints efficiently, states can create formal, pretrial procedures in which governments can negotiate with litigants before a case ever goes to court. If disputes are resolved during pretrial negotiations, it can be very difficult to tell what has happened. Are governments coming into compliance? If so, are they only doing so when they have accidentally committed a violation or even when they are intentionally resisting? Or are challenges simply being dropped? This paper presents a formal model to address these questions. We develop our theory in the context of the European Union (EU). To test our model, we collect a new dataset of over 13,000 Commission infringement cases against EU member states (2003–2013). Our results suggest that accidental and intentional noncompliance both occur, but that intentional noncompliance is more common in the EU. We find that the Commission is an effective, if imperfect, monitor and enforcer of international law. The Commission can correct intentional noncompliance, but not always. It strategically drops cases that it believes it is unlikely to win.

Non-uniform Application of European Union Private International Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 83-94
Author(s):  
Katarina Trimmings ◽  
Burcu Yüksel
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
International Law ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
Funded Project ◽  
The Eu

This chapter draws on the findings of an EU-funded project titled (‘Cross-Border Litigation in Europe: Private International Law Legislative Framework, National Courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union’ (EUPILLAR) and discusses concerns over the lack of uniformity in the interpretation and application of the key EU Private International Law Regulations (Brussels I Regulation, Brussels IIa Regulation, Rome I Regulation, Rome II Regulation, Maintenance Regulation) across the EU Member States. The chapter provides examples of differing interpretations and applications of the same EU private international law rules in the EU through examples from various EU Member States, analyses the reasons behind the non-uniform interpretation and application, and suggests specific ways to rectify these problems.

Political aspects of security of the European Union Member States

2020 ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Kusztykiewicz-Fedurek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Political Security ◽  
New Institutions ◽  
The Stability ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
The Eu

Political security is very often considered through the prism of individual states. In the scholar literature in-depth analyses of this kind of security are rarely encountered in the context of international entities that these countries integrate. The purpose of this article is to draw attention to key aspects of political security in the European Union (EU) Member States. The EU as a supranational organisation, gathering Member States first, ensures the stability of the EU as a whole, and secondly, it ensures that Member States respect common values and principles. Additionally, the EU institutions focus on ensuring the proper functioning of the Eurozone (also called officially “euro area” in EU regulations). Actions that may have a negative impact on the level of the EU’s political security include the boycott of establishing new institutions conducive to the peaceful coexistence and development of states. These threats seem to have a significant impact on the situation in the EU in the face of the proposed (and not accepted by Member States not belonging to the Eurogroup) Eurozone reforms concerning, inter alia, appointment of the Minister of Economy and Finance and the creation of a new institution - the European Monetary Fund.

Practice of the member states of the European Union in the field of anti-corruption regulation

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dmytro S. Melnyk ◽  
Oleg A. Parfylo ◽  
Oleksii V. Butenko ◽  
Olena V. Tykhonova ◽  
Volodymyr O. Zarosylo
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
Content Analysis Method ◽  
The Eu

Purpose The experience of most European Union (EU) Member States has demonstrated effective anti-corruption practices, making the EU one of the leaders in this field, which can be used as an example to learn from in the field of anti-corruption. The purpose of this study is to analyze and identify the main features of anti-corruption legislation and strategies to prevent corruption at the national and supranational levels of the EU. Design/methodology/approach The following methods were used in the work: discourse and content analysis, method of system analysis, method of induction and deduction, historical-legal method, formal-legal method, comparative-legal method and others. Using the historical and legal method, the evolution of the formation of anti-corruption regulation at the supranational level was revealed. The comparative law method helped to compare the practices of the Member States of the EU in the field of anti-corruption regulation. The formal-legal method is used for generalization, classification and systematization of research results, as well as for the correct presentation of these results. Findings The main results, prospects for further research and the value of the material. The paper offers a critical review of key EU legal instruments on corruption, from the first initiatives taken in the mid-1990s to recent years. Originality/value In addition, the article analyzes the relevant anti-corruption legislation in the EU member states that are in the top 10 countries with the lowest level of corruption, namely: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany and Luxembourg.

scholarly journals National Food Safety Systems in the European Union: A Comparative Survey

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Hadjigeorgiou ◽  
Elpidoforos S. Soteriades ◽  
Anastasios Philalithis ◽  
Anna Psaroulaki ◽  
Yiannis Tselentis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
European Union ◽  
Food Safety ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Comparative Survey ◽  
Safety Systems ◽  
Central Level ◽  
The Eu

This paper is a comparative survey of the National Food Safety Systems (NFSS) of the European Union (EU) Member-States (MS) and the Central EU level. The main organizational structures of the NFSS, their legal frameworks, their responsibilities, their experiences, and challenges relating to food safety are discussed. Growing concerns about food safety have led the EU itself, its MS and non-EU countries, which are EU trade-partners, to review and modify their food safety systems. Our study suggests that the EU and 22 out of 27 Member States (MS) have reorganized their NFSS by establishing a single food safety authority or a similar organization on the national or central level. In addition, the study analyzes different approaches towards the establishment of such agencies. Areas where marked differences in approaches were seen included the division of responsibilities for risk assessment (RA), risk management (RM), and risk communication (RC). We found that in 12 Member States, all three areas of activity (RA, RM, and RC) are kept together, whereas in 10 Member States, risk management is functionally or institutionally separate from risk assessment and risk communication. No single ideal model for others to follow for the organization of a food safety authority was observed; however, revised NFSS, either in EU member states or at the EU central level, may be more effective from the previous arrangements, because they provide central supervision, give priority to food control programs, and maintain comprehensive risk analysis as part of their activities.

scholarly journals European Green Deal as a matter of security

2021 ◽  
Vol 900 (1) ◽  
pp. 012035
Author(s):  
P Polko
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Energy Transport ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Policy Initiatives ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Particular Solutions ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The European Green Deal (EGD) is a set of policy initiatives by the European Union with the overarching and ambitious aim of making Europe climate neutral in 2050. Being world’s first ‘climate-neutral bloc’ and fulfilling other goals extending to many different sectors, including construction, biodiversity, energy, transport, food and others has also an impact on different sectors of security. The implementation of the tasks set out in the EGD requires taking into account the necessity of sustainability in reaching the goals, including not violating sectoral security in the EU Member States. Nexus approach might be useful in the processes of finding and implementation of particular solutions.

scholarly journals The Rule of Law Framework in the European Union: Its Rationale, Origins, Role and International Ramifications

2021 ◽  
pp. 305-331
Author(s):  
Artur Nowak-Far
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
High Level ◽  
The Eu

AbstractAt present, the European rule of law enforcement framework under Article 7 TEU (RLF) is vulnerable to unguaranteed, discretionary influences of the Member States. This vulnerability arises from its procedural format which requires high thresholds in decision-making with the effect that this procedure is prone to be terminated by the EU Member States likely to be scrutinized under it, if only they collude. Yet, the Framework may prove effective to correct serious breaches against human rights (in the context of ineffective rule of law standards). The European Commission is bound to pursue the RLF effectiveness for the sake of achieving relative uniformity of application of EU law (at large), and making the European Union a credible actor and co-creator of international legal order. The RLF is an important tool for the maintenance of relative stability of human rights and the rule of law in the EU despite natural divergence propensity resulting from the procedural autonomy of the EU Member States. By achieving this stability, the EU achieves significant political weight in international dialogue concerning human rights and the rule of law and preserves a high level of its global credibility in this context. Thus, RLF increases the EU’s effectiveness in promoting the European model of their identification and enforcement.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document