Advanced

Sweden and Frontex - A discussion of coherency within the European asylum system

Modin Håkansson, Christina LU (2012) JURM02 20122
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Den här uppsatsen behandlar huruvida den Europeiska byrån för förvaltningen av det operativa samarbetet vid Europeiska Unionens medlemsstaters yttre gränser, Frontex, genom sitt arbete orsakar hinder för flyktingars möjlighet att utnyttja sin rättighet att söka asyl. Då den Europeiska Unionen (EU) har ett pågående arbete för att harmonisera de nationella asylsystemen i medlemsstaterna blir det intressant att undersöka huruvida det finns koherens inom systemet. Eftersom både de nationella staterna samt EU som enhet är bundna av EU-regleringar såväl som internationella instrument bör man därför kunna efterfråga koherens mellan såväl de faktiska regelverken som den faktiska behandling en potentiell flykting möter vid olika gränser inom... (More)
Den här uppsatsen behandlar huruvida den Europeiska byrån för förvaltningen av det operativa samarbetet vid Europeiska Unionens medlemsstaters yttre gränser, Frontex, genom sitt arbete orsakar hinder för flyktingars möjlighet att utnyttja sin rättighet att söka asyl. Då den Europeiska Unionen (EU) har ett pågående arbete för att harmonisera de nationella asylsystemen i medlemsstaterna blir det intressant att undersöka huruvida det finns koherens inom systemet. Eftersom både de nationella staterna samt EU som enhet är bundna av EU-regleringar såväl som internationella instrument bör man därför kunna efterfråga koherens mellan såväl de faktiska regelverken som den faktiska behandling en potentiell flykting möter vid olika gränser inom unionen. Som mått för koherens används Principen om den Formella Rättvisan, vilken utgår från att alla individer som kan bli kategoriserade som tillhörande en och samma grupp då också bör behandlas lika för att behandlingen skall vara rättvis. Den valda situationen för undersökningen är vilken potentiell mest ingripande sanktion som en potentiell flykting kan utsättas för vid kontakt med Sveriges gräns respektive någon annan gräns inom EU-området. Rörande Sverige visade det sig att den mest ingripande sanktionen var att individen får lämna landet utan att få tillgång till en prövning av sin ansökan. Detta kan ske i två fall, vid uppenbart ogrundade ansökningar eller vid så kallade Dublin-fall. I det första fallet sker en om-kategorisering av den sökande eftersom det anses uppenbart att personen saknar skyddsskäl. I det andra fallet fattas inget beslut rörande den sökandes potentiella skyddsskäl utan enbart rörande vilken stat som är ansvarig för att pröva ansökan. Det kan därför inte anses att koherens saknas med det gällande regelverket.

Rörande EU-området visade undersökningen att det finns en risk för att Frontex i sitt arbete kan hindra potentiella flyktingar från att framföra sin asylansökan. Detta under deras arbete med att hindra individer som försöker ta sig förbi EU:s yttre gränser. I dessa fall riskerar individer att avvisas utan att ha fått möjlighet att framföra ett anspråk på skydd eller få sin ansökan prövad av den auktoriserade myndigheten. Det saknas tydliga instruktioner och regler kring hur kategoriseringen av individerna skall göras, vilket är avgörande för att upprätthålla individernas tillgång till sina rättigheter, framförallt rätten att söka asyl. Eftersom dessa procedurer saknas föreligger ett problem med rättssäkerheten i systemet då alla individer inte kan garanteras varken tillgång till en juridisk process eller likvärdig behandling. Det föreligger alltså inte koherens inom systemet. Detta kan ha att göra med en diskursändring inom EU där potentiella flyktingar framförallt ses som illegala och därmed potentiella hot, vilket leder till att säkerställandet att ingen kan passera de yttre gränserna illegalt tar prioritet framför att upprätthålla och tillhandahålla individers rätt att söka asyl. Bristen på regelverk kring hur separationen mellan potentiella flyktingar och övriga skall hanteras i de faktiska situationerna är dock ett av de största problemen och bör åtgärdas snarast. (Less)
Abstract
This paper addresses whether the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders, Frontex, through their work causes obstacles for refugees in exercising their right to seek asylum. As the European Union (EU) has an ongoing effort to harmonize the national asylum systems of the Member States it is interesting to examine whether the system is coherent. Since both the national states and the EU as an entity is bound by EU regulations as well as international instruments it should be aspired for coherency in the system as well as the actual treatment a potential refugee would meet at the various borders within the Union. As a measurement of coherency I use the principle of the Formal Justice, which... (More)
This paper addresses whether the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders, Frontex, through their work causes obstacles for refugees in exercising their right to seek asylum. As the European Union (EU) has an ongoing effort to harmonize the national asylum systems of the Member States it is interesting to examine whether the system is coherent. Since both the national states and the EU as an entity is bound by EU regulations as well as international instruments it should be aspired for coherency in the system as well as the actual treatment a potential refugee would meet at the various borders within the Union. As a measurement of coherency I use the principle of the Formal Justice, which assumes that all individuals that can be categorized as belonging to the same group, in this case a group with the same legal status, also should be treated equally, if the treatment is to be considered just. The selected situation of the investigation is the potential most severe sanction a potential refugee may face when coming in contact with the Swedish border and other borders in the EU area. Concerning Sweden it was shown that the most invasive sanction was that the individual would be forced to leave the country without first having access to a review of his or hers application. This can happen in two cases, if an application is found manifestly ill founded or abusive, or in so-called Dublin cases. In the first case, a re-categorization of the applicant is made when it is considered obvious that the applicant has no potential grounds for protection. In the second case no decision is made regarding the applicant's potential grounds for protection but only regarding which state is responsible for processing the application. These sanctions cannot be considered to lack coherency with the existing legal framework.

Regarding the EU area, the investigation showed that Frontex in their work of prohibiting individuals who try to cross the EU’s external borders possibly could prevent potential refugees from presenting an application for asylum. In these cases the aliens suffer risk of rejection without having the opportunity to present an application for asylum and having it assessed by the proper authorities. There is a lack of clear instructions and rules about how the categorization of individuals should be made, which is crucial for maintaining the individuals access to their rights, especially the right to seek asylum. Since these procedures are lacking, there is a problem with the rule of law in the system, which means that all individuals cannot be guaranteed neither access to a judicial process or equitable treatment. Consequently, there is a lack of coherency in the system. This may have to do with a change of discourse within the EU where potential refugees mainly is seen as illegal and thus potential threats, which leads to ensuring that no one can cross the external borders illegally takes priority over maintaining and providing individuals the right to seek asylum. However, the lack of regulations on how this should be done in real situations is one of the major problems and should be addressed urgently. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Modin Håkansson, Christina LU
supervisor
organization
course
JURM02 20122
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
EU-rätt, EU-law, folkrätt, public international law, asylrätt, asylum law, human rights, mänskliga rättigheter, coherency, asyl, asylum, Frontex
language
English
id
3350221
date added to LUP
2013-01-31 08:38:19
date last changed
2013-01-31 08:38:19
@misc{3350221,
  abstract     = {This paper addresses whether the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders, Frontex, through their work causes obstacles for refugees in exercising their right to seek asylum. As the European Union (EU) has an ongoing effort to harmonize the national asylum systems of the Member States it is interesting to examine whether the system is coherent. Since both the national states and the EU as an entity is bound by EU regulations as well as international instruments it should be aspired for coherency in the system as well as the actual treatment a potential refugee would meet at the various borders within the Union. As a measurement of coherency I use the principle of the Formal Justice, which assumes that all individuals that can be categorized as belonging to the same group, in this case a group with the same legal status, also should be treated equally, if the treatment is to be considered just. The selected situation of the investigation is the potential most severe sanction a potential refugee may face when coming in contact with the Swedish border and other borders in the EU area. Concerning Sweden it was shown that the most invasive sanction was that the individual would be forced to leave the country without first having access to a review of his or hers application. This can happen in two cases, if an application is found manifestly ill founded or abusive, or in so-called Dublin cases. In the first case, a re-categorization of the applicant is made when it is considered obvious that the applicant has no potential grounds for protection. In the second case no decision is made regarding the applicant's potential grounds for protection but only regarding which state is responsible for processing the application. These sanctions cannot be considered to lack coherency with the existing legal framework.

Regarding the EU area, the investigation showed that Frontex in their work of prohibiting individuals who try to cross the EU’s external borders possibly could prevent potential refugees from presenting an application for asylum. In these cases the aliens suffer risk of rejection without having the opportunity to present an application for asylum and having it assessed by the proper authorities. There is a lack of clear instructions and rules about how the categorization of individuals should be made, which is crucial for maintaining the individuals access to their rights, especially the right to seek asylum. Since these procedures are lacking, there is a problem with the rule of law in the system, which means that all individuals cannot be guaranteed neither access to a judicial process or equitable treatment. Consequently, there is a lack of coherency in the system. This may have to do with a change of discourse within the EU where potential refugees mainly is seen as illegal and thus potential threats, which leads to ensuring that no one can cross the external borders illegally takes priority over maintaining and providing individuals the right to seek asylum. However, the lack of regulations on how this should be done in real situations is one of the major problems and should be addressed urgently.},
  author       = {Modin Håkansson, Christina},
  keyword      = {EU-rätt,EU-law,folkrätt,public international law,asylrätt,asylum law,human rights,mänskliga rättigheter,coherency,asyl,asylum,Frontex},
  language     = {eng},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Sweden and Frontex - A discussion of coherency within the European asylum system},
  year         = {2012},
}