Der Schutz der Familieneinheit in Dublin-Verfahren

Dieser Beitrag untersucht, ob sich durch die am 1.1.2014 in Kraft getretene Dublin-III-Verordnung Verbesserungen für den Schutz der Familieneinheit in Dublin-Verfahren ergeben und worin diese bestehen. Dazu werden die alte und die neue Rechtslage verglichen und schließlich in Bezug zu den bestehenden völkerrechtlichen Verpflichtungen der Mitgliedstaaten gesetzt.

Le partage des responsabilités dans l'espace Dublin, entre confiance mutuelle et sécurité des demandeurs d'asile

On 21 January 2011, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgment in the case of MSS v. Belgium and Greece. This judgment puts into question the practices followed by many national authorities in the implementation of the Dublin system. Particularly noteworthy are the effects on the "safety presumption" that Member States accord to each other in the field of asylum. The authors explore the implications of the MSS decision, first, in regard of the evidentiary requirements imposed on asylum seekers to rebut the safety presumption. They come to the conclusion that through the decision, a real paradigm-shift has taken place - from the theoretical to the actual supremacy of the non-refoulement principle in Dublin matters. This is also true in light of the increased requirements imposed by the Court as regards the scope and depth of judicial review on transfer decisions. Moreover, the MSS judgment could give new impetus to the stalled reform process concerning the Dublin Regulation. Indeed, the Court's decision seems to enshrine in positive ECHR law the most progressive elements of the Commission's proposal, including procedural guarantees and, de facto, the mechanism for the temporary suspension of transfers to member states not offering adequate protection.

Setting up a Common European Asylum System : Report on the application of existing instruments and proposals for the new system

The study assesses firstly the evaluation process of the first generation of asylum instruments while underlining the possibilities to improve it. It analyses secondly the asylum "acquis" regarding distribution of refugees between Member States, the eligibility for protection, the status of protected persons regarding detention and vulnerability, asylum procedures and the external dimension by formulating short-term recommendations of each area. Its last part is devoted to the long term evolution of the Common European Asylum System regarding the legal context including the accession of the EU to the Geneva Convention, the institutional perspectives including the new European Support Office, the jurisdictional perspective, the substantive perspective, the distributive perspective and the external perspective.