Advanced

Protection from Internal Armed Conflict in European and Swedish Asylum Law

Bengtsson, Petter LU (2014) JURM01 20142
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Skydd på grund av en inre väpnad konflikt är en del av det gemensamma europeiska asylsystem som varit under utveckling sedan 1980-talet. De EU-rättsliga bestämmelser som idag reglerar sådant skydd återfinns i Skyddsgrundsdirektivets artiklar rörande alternativt skyddsbehövande. Skyddsgrundsdirektivets bestämmelser om skydd på grund av inre väpnad konflikt införlivades i svensk rätt genom lagändringar i Utlänningslagen (2005:716) som trädde i kraft i januari 2010. Skydd undan inre väpnad konflikt regleras sedan dess i två skilda bestämmelser i utlänningslagen, förutom den transponerade bestämmelsen om alternativt skyddsbehövande omfattar även utlänningslagens bestämmelse om skyddsbehövande i övrigt de som flyr inre väpnad konflikt.

... (More)
Skydd på grund av en inre väpnad konflikt är en del av det gemensamma europeiska asylsystem som varit under utveckling sedan 1980-talet. De EU-rättsliga bestämmelser som idag reglerar sådant skydd återfinns i Skyddsgrundsdirektivets artiklar rörande alternativt skyddsbehövande. Skyddsgrundsdirektivets bestämmelser om skydd på grund av inre väpnad konflikt införlivades i svensk rätt genom lagändringar i Utlänningslagen (2005:716) som trädde i kraft i januari 2010. Skydd undan inre väpnad konflikt regleras sedan dess i två skilda bestämmelser i utlänningslagen, förutom den transponerade bestämmelsen om alternativt skyddsbehövande omfattar även utlänningslagens bestämmelse om skyddsbehövande i övrigt de som flyr inre väpnad konflikt.

Frågan om hur en inre väpnad konflikt ska definieras är av stor betydelse vid prövning av vem som ska beredas alternativt skydd enligt Skyddsgrundsdirektivet och Utlänningslagen, och den har varit föremål för domstolsprövning i såväl EU-domstolen som Migrationsöverdomstolen. Migrationsöverdomstolen har i ett antal avgöranden begagnat sig av en definition som bär tydliga tecknen på att ha inspirerats av den internationella humanitära rätten. Humanitärrättens inflytande på hur begreppet inre väpnad konflikt definieras inom asylrätten har dock kritiserats på grund av att den anses leda till en för snäv definition, som därutöver lämnar stort tolkningsutrymme till de tillämpande myndigheterna och domstolarna.

I Diakité¬-domen, som meddelades i januari 2014, fastslog EU-domstolen att det vid tillämpningen Skyddsgrundsdirektivet inte är nödvändigt att en inre väpnad konflikt definieras som en sådan enligt humanitärrätten för att direktivets skyddsbestämmelser ska vara tillämpliga. EU-domstolen begagnar sig istället av en mindre strikt definition och fastslår att det väsentliga i bedömningen är huruvida konflikten kan anses ge upphov till ett allvarligt och personligt hot på grund av det urskiljningslösa våld som konflikten ger upphov till.

Diakité-domen har ännu inte aktualiserats i något praxisgrundande rättsfall i Migrationsöverdomstolen. I bedömningen av alternativt skyddsbehov är Migrationsöverdomstolen emellertid bunden av EU-domstolens avgörande i Diakité. Huruvida Migrationsöverdomstolen också kommer att tillämpa den vidare definitionen av inre väpnad konflikt vid prövning enligt bestämmelsen om övrigt skyddsbehövande återstår att se. Därmed kvarstår också frågan vilka effekter EU-domstolens avgörande kommer att ha på den inbördes relationen mellan utlänningslagens olika bestämmelser om skydd på grund av inre väpnad konflikt. (Less)
Abstract
Protection from internal armed conflict is an integral part of the Common European Asylum System, as it has developed since the 1980s. The common European provisions governing such protection are found in the EU Qualification Directive, where they form part of what is labelled subsidiary protection. These provisions have been transposed into Swedish legislation by way of amendments to the Aliens Act in January 2010. Protection from internal armed conflict thus came to be governed by two different provisions in the Aliens Act, as the previous provision on persons otherwise in need of protection was kept.

The question of how an internal armed conflict is to be defined is of great importance in applying the provisions on subsidiary... (More)
Protection from internal armed conflict is an integral part of the Common European Asylum System, as it has developed since the 1980s. The common European provisions governing such protection are found in the EU Qualification Directive, where they form part of what is labelled subsidiary protection. These provisions have been transposed into Swedish legislation by way of amendments to the Aliens Act in January 2010. Protection from internal armed conflict thus came to be governed by two different provisions in the Aliens Act, as the previous provision on persons otherwise in need of protection was kept.

The question of how an internal armed conflict is to be defined is of great importance in applying the provisions on subsidiary protection in the Qualifications Directive and the Aliens Act, and it has been the subject of judicial review in both the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the Swedish Migration Court of Appeal. In a number of judgements, the Migration Court of Appeal has applied a definition inspired by international humanitarian law (IHL). The influence of IHL on the definition of internal armed conflict in asylum law has however been criticized because it results in a definition that is considered to be too narrow, and because it leaves too much margin of appreciation to the deciding authorities and courts.

In the Diakité-judgement, delivered in January 2014, the CJEU establishes that, for the purpose of applying the relevant provisions of the Qualification Directive, it is not necessary for an internal armed conflict to characterised as such under IHL. Instead, the CJEU applies a less strict definition of the concept and establishes that the decisive factor is whether the conflict can be found to give rise to a serious and individual threat by reason of the indiscriminate violence stemming from the conflict in question.

The Diakité-judgement is yet to be commented on by the Migration Court of Appeal in a precedent-setting decision. The Migration Court of Appeal is however bound by the Diakité-judgement in applying the transposed provision on subsidiary protection. Whether the Migration Court of Appeal will also use the wider definition of internal armed conflict in applying the provision on persons otherwise in need of protection remains to be seen. Hence, it is still not entirely clear how the Diakité-judgement will affect the interrelation between the different provisions governing protection from internal armed conflict in the Aliens Act. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Bengtsson, Petter LU
supervisor
organization
course
JURM01 20142
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
EU law, public international law
language
English
id
4895562
date added to LUP
2015-02-03 12:16:31
date last changed
2015-02-03 12:16:31
@misc{4895562,
  abstract     = {Protection from internal armed conflict is an integral part of the Common European Asylum System, as it has developed since the 1980s. The common European provisions governing such protection are found in the EU Qualification Directive, where they form part of what is labelled subsidiary protection. These provisions have been transposed into Swedish legislation by way of amendments to the Aliens Act in January 2010. Protection from internal armed conflict thus came to be governed by two different provisions in the Aliens Act, as the previous provision on persons otherwise in need of protection was kept.

The question of how an internal armed conflict is to be defined is of great importance in applying the provisions on subsidiary protection in the Qualifications Directive and the Aliens Act, and it has been the subject of judicial review in both the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the Swedish Migration Court of Appeal. In a number of judgements, the Migration Court of Appeal has applied a definition inspired by international humanitarian law (IHL). The influence of IHL on the definition of internal armed conflict in asylum law has however been criticized because it results in a definition that is considered to be too narrow, and because it leaves too much margin of appreciation to the deciding authorities and courts.

In the Diakité-judgement, delivered in January 2014, the CJEU establishes that, for the purpose of applying the relevant provisions of the Qualification Directive, it is not necessary for an internal armed conflict to characterised as such under IHL. Instead, the CJEU applies a less strict definition of the concept and establishes that the decisive factor is whether the conflict can be found to give rise to a serious and individual threat by reason of the indiscriminate violence stemming from the conflict in question.

The Diakité-judgement is yet to be commented on by the Migration Court of Appeal in a precedent-setting decision. The Migration Court of Appeal is however bound by the Diakité-judgement in applying the transposed provision on subsidiary protection. Whether the Migration Court of Appeal will also use the wider definition of internal armed conflict in applying the provision on persons otherwise in need of protection remains to be seen. Hence, it is still not entirely clear how the Diakité-judgement will affect the interrelation between the different provisions governing protection from internal armed conflict in the Aliens Act.},
  author       = {Bengtsson, Petter},
  keyword      = {EU law,public international law},
  language     = {eng},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Protection from Internal Armed Conflict in European and Swedish Asylum Law},
  year         = {2014},
}