Advanced

In the Union we trust - Ansvarsfördelning enligt Dublinförordningen och principen om non-refoulement

Al Juburi, Durrar LU (2017) JURM02 20171
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Europeiska unionens 28 suveräna medlemsstater har egna lagar som reglerar asyl- och invandringsfrågor. Däremot har medlemsstaterna på grund av gemensamma utmaningar avseende genom tiden olika flyktingvågor insett behovet av en gemensam asylpolitik. Det europeiska samarbetet kring asyl- och invandringsfrågor, som bygger på principen om solidaritet och rättvis ansvarsfördelning, har lett till etablerandet av ett gemensamt asylsystem. Detta system består bland annat av Dublinförordningen, som säkerställer att en skyddsbehövande får tillgång till en prövning av hens asylansökan i en ansvarig medlemsstat. Förordningen bygger på utgångspunkten att den medlemsstat varigenom en asylsökande tagit sig in till EU ska bära ansvaret för att pröva... (More)
Europeiska unionens 28 suveräna medlemsstater har egna lagar som reglerar asyl- och invandringsfrågor. Däremot har medlemsstaterna på grund av gemensamma utmaningar avseende genom tiden olika flyktingvågor insett behovet av en gemensam asylpolitik. Det europeiska samarbetet kring asyl- och invandringsfrågor, som bygger på principen om solidaritet och rättvis ansvarsfördelning, har lett till etablerandet av ett gemensamt asylsystem. Detta system består bland annat av Dublinförordningen, som säkerställer att en skyddsbehövande får tillgång till en prövning av hens asylansökan i en ansvarig medlemsstat. Förordningen bygger på utgångspunkten att den medlemsstat varigenom en asylsökande tagit sig in till EU ska bära ansvaret för att pröva dennes asylansökan.

Dublinförordningen utgår från principen om ömsesidigt förtroende, innebärande att samtliga medlemsstater antas vara säkra asylländer för tredjelandsmedborgare. Detta antagande kan emellertid komma i konflikt med den internationella principen om non-refoulement. Principen stadgar att en asylsökande inte får utvisas till ett land, där hen bland annat riskerar att utsättas för tortyr eller annan omänsklig eller förnedrande behandling.

Uppsatsen diskuterar vilka relevanta skyldigheter som kan komma i fråga för medlemsstaterna vid en bedömning om överföring enligt Dublinförordningen. Vidare undersöks, utifrån EU-domstolens och Europadomstolens praxis, möjligheten att göra undantag från principen om ömsesidigt förtroende till förmån för principen om non-refoulement. Båda domstolar är överens om att principen om ömsesidigt förtroende kan motbevisas, förutsatt att det finns starka skäl att tro att den skyddssökande löper en reell risk att utsättas för tortyr, omänsklig eller förnedrande behandling i mottagarlandet. Däremot har EU-domstolen uppställt ett krav på att risken ska vara orsakad av systemiska brister i mottagarlandets asylförfarande och mottagningsvillkor. Detta krav har införlivats i Dublin III-förordningen.

Antagandet om säkra asylländer leder till en rutinmässig tillämpning av Dublinförordningen. Vidare medför utgångspunkten att den medlemsstat varigenom den sökande tagit sig in till EU utgör ansvarig medlemsstat en oproportionerlig börda för vissa medlemsstater. Det odefinierade kravet på systemiska brister och antagandet om säkra asylländer, förutom att skapa rättsosäkerhet, även försätter den skyddssökande i en särskilt utsatt situation. (Less)
Abstract
The 28 sovereign Member States of the European Union have their own laws governing asylum and immigration issues. The Member States have, due to mutual challenges concerning migrant crisis, identified the need for a common asylum policy. The European cooperation on asylum and immigration issues, based on the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, has led to the establishment of a common European asylum system. This system consists of, inter alia, the Dublin Regulation, which ensures the asylum seeker’s access to an examination of his or her asylum application in one responsible Member State. The regulation is based on the assumption that the Member State through which an asylum seeker has entered the EU shall bear the... (More)
The 28 sovereign Member States of the European Union have their own laws governing asylum and immigration issues. The Member States have, due to mutual challenges concerning migrant crisis, identified the need for a common asylum policy. The European cooperation on asylum and immigration issues, based on the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, has led to the establishment of a common European asylum system. This system consists of, inter alia, the Dublin Regulation, which ensures the asylum seeker’s access to an examination of his or her asylum application in one responsible Member State. The regulation is based on the assumption that the Member State through which an asylum seeker has entered the EU shall bear the responsibility of examining his or her asylum application.

The Dublin Regulation is further based on the principle of mutual trust, meaning that all Member States are considered safe countries of asylum for third-country nationals. However, this assumption may conflict with the international principle of non-refoulement. According to this principle, an asylum seeker may not be expelled to a country where he or she may be subjected to torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment.

This thesis discusses the obligations that may arise for Member States in an assessment of transfers under the Dublin Regulation. Furthermore, the thesis examines the possibility of derogating from the principle of mutual trust in favor of the principle of non-refoulement, with regard to the practice of the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. Both courts agree that the principle of mutual trust can be revoked, if there are strong grounds for believing that the asylum seeker is at real risk of being subjected to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment in the receiving country. On the other hand, the European Court of Justice has imposed a requirement meaning that the risk should be caused by systemic shortcomings in the asylum procedure and reception conditions of the receiving state. This requirement has been incorporated in the Dublin III-Regulation.

The assumption that all Member States are considered as safe asylum countries leads to a systematic application of the Dublin Regulation. Furthermore, the premise that the Member State through which an asylum seeker enters the EU shall bear the responsibility of examination the asylum application constitutes a disproportionate burden for certain Member States. The undefined requirement of systemic shortcomings and the assumption of safe countries of asylum not only create legal uncertainty, but also put the asylum seeker in a particularly vulnerable situation. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Al Juburi, Durrar LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
In the Union we trust - Responsibility sharing under the Dublin Regulation and the principle on non-refoulement
course
JURM02 20171
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
EU-rätt, EU-law
language
Swedish
id
8908903
date added to LUP
2017-06-07 17:30:26
date last changed
2017-06-07 17:30:26
@misc{8908903,
  abstract     = {The 28 sovereign Member States of the European Union have their own laws governing asylum and immigration issues. The Member States have, due to mutual challenges concerning migrant crisis, identified the need for a common asylum policy. The European cooperation on asylum and immigration issues, based on the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, has led to the establishment of a common European asylum system. This system consists of, inter alia, the Dublin Regulation, which ensures the asylum seeker’s access to an examination of his or her asylum application in one responsible Member State. The regulation is based on the assumption that the Member State through which an asylum seeker has entered the EU shall bear the responsibility of examining his or her asylum application. 

The Dublin Regulation is further based on the principle of mutual trust, meaning that all Member States are considered safe countries of asylum for third-country nationals. However, this assumption may conflict with the international principle of non-refoulement. According to this principle, an asylum seeker may not be expelled to a country where he or she may be subjected to torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment. 

This thesis discusses the obligations that may arise for Member States in an assessment of transfers under the Dublin Regulation. Furthermore, the thesis examines the possibility of derogating from the principle of mutual trust in favor of the principle of non-refoulement, with regard to the practice of the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. Both courts agree that the principle of mutual trust can be revoked, if there are strong grounds for believing that the asylum seeker is at real risk of being subjected to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment in the receiving country. On the other hand, the European Court of Justice has imposed a requirement meaning that the risk should be caused by systemic shortcomings in the asylum procedure and reception conditions of the receiving state. This requirement has been incorporated in the Dublin III-Regulation. 

The assumption that all Member States are considered as safe asylum countries leads to a systematic application of the Dublin Regulation. Furthermore, the premise that the Member State through which an asylum seeker enters the EU shall bear the responsibility of examination the asylum application constitutes a disproportionate burden for certain Member States. The undefined requirement of systemic shortcomings and the assumption of safe countries of asylum not only create legal uncertainty, but also put the asylum seeker in a particularly vulnerable situation.},
  author       = {Al Juburi, Durrar},
  keyword      = {EU-rätt,EU-law},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {In the Union we trust - Ansvarsfördelning enligt Dublinförordningen och principen om non-refoulement},
  year         = {2017},
}