När diskriminering står mot rättvisa - Hur begränsningen av samkönade partners fria rörlighet inom EU överensstämmer med unionens mål
(2020) JURM02 20202Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Det här examensarbetet är inspirerat av den samhällsutvecklingen som sker framför våra ögon, där alltfler samkönade relationer tillkommer men lämnas fortfarande utanför på grund av deras begränsade rättigheter i den fria rörligheten. Den fria rörligheten för personer och deras familjemedlemmar är en av EU:s grundläggande principer, rättigheten måste därmed vara omfattande genom att ge alla unionsmedborgare och deras familjemedlemmar samma möjlighet till fri rörlighet. En konsekvens av att rättigheten inte är omfattande blir att samkönade par har en begränsad fri rörlighet då utfallet är högst beroende av den aktuella medlemsstatens nationella lagstiftning, det är oförutsägbart vilket inte eftersträvas. Samkönade par där båda parterna är... (More)
- Det här examensarbetet är inspirerat av den samhällsutvecklingen som sker framför våra ögon, där alltfler samkönade relationer tillkommer men lämnas fortfarande utanför på grund av deras begränsade rättigheter i den fria rörligheten. Den fria rörligheten för personer och deras familjemedlemmar är en av EU:s grundläggande principer, rättigheten måste därmed vara omfattande genom att ge alla unionsmedborgare och deras familjemedlemmar samma möjlighet till fri rörlighet. En konsekvens av att rättigheten inte är omfattande blir att samkönade par har en begränsad fri rörlighet då utfallet är högst beroende av den aktuella medlemsstatens nationella lagstiftning, det är oförutsägbart vilket inte eftersträvas. Samkönade par där båda parterna är unionsmedborgare kan utnyttja sin fria rörlighet i egenskap av unionsmedborgare, men när flytten väl skett till medlemsstaten är det inte garanterat att det går att formalisera en relation i medlemsstaten. Tredjelandsmedborgare som omfattas av definitionen familjemedlemmar i en samkönad relation blir mest lidande, då dessa inte kan utnyttja sin fria rörlighet i egenskap av unionsmedborgare och därför får dessa förlita sig helt på medlemsstaters nationella lagstiftning för att uppehålla sig i medlemsstaten.
Det är även intressant att se huruvida rådande situation är kompatibel med unionens mål eller om de gemensamt uppsatta målen i fördragen motarbetas genom den selektiva diskriminering som sker i de medlemsstater som inte tillåter samkönade par att formalisera en relation där.
Situationen är väldigt komplex på grund av unionens begränsade befogenhet på området, å ena sidan främjas mångfald men å andra sidan är det svårt att begränsa nationell lagstiftning på området på grund av otydliga och inte tillräckligt strikta tolkningsmarginaler. Det gör att frågan hamnar i en form av grå zon vilket gör att unionen blir bakbunden på grund av oförmågan att ingripa fullt ut.
Slutsatsen blir att den selektiva diskrimineringen sannolikt strider mot de gemensamt uppsatta målen i fördragen på grund av exkluderingen av samkönade par samt deras familjemedlemmar. (Less) - Abstract
- This thesis is inspired by the societal development that is taking place before our eyes where, more and more same-sex relationships are added but are still left out due to their limited rights in free movement. The free movement of persons and their family members is one of the fundamental principles of the EU, and the right must therefore be comprehensive by giving all Union citizens and their family members the same opportunity for free movement. One consequence of the fact that the right is not extensive is that same-sex couples have a limited free movement as the outcome is highly dependent on the national law of the Member State in question, it is unpredictable which is not sought. Same-sex couples where both parties are citizens of... (More)
- This thesis is inspired by the societal development that is taking place before our eyes where, more and more same-sex relationships are added but are still left out due to their limited rights in free movement. The free movement of persons and their family members is one of the fundamental principles of the EU, and the right must therefore be comprehensive by giving all Union citizens and their family members the same opportunity for free movement. One consequence of the fact that the right is not extensive is that same-sex couples have a limited free movement as the outcome is highly dependent on the national law of the Member State in question, it is unpredictable which is not sought. Same-sex couples where both parties are citizens of the union can exercise their free movement as citizens of the Union, but once the transfer has taken place to the Member State, it is not guaranteed that a relationship can be formalized. Third-country nationals covered by the definition of family members in a same-sex relationship suffer the most, as they are unable to exercise their free movement as Union citizens and therefore have to rely entirely on the national law of the Member States to reside in that Member State.
Is is also interesting to see whether the current situation is compatible with the objectives of the Union or whether the common objectives of the Treaties are counteracted by the selective discrimination that takes place in those Member States that do not allow same-sex couples to formalize a relationship there.
The situation is very complex due to the Union´s limited competence in this area, on the one hand diversity is promoted but on the other hand it is difficult do restrict national legislation in this area due to unclear and not sufficiently strict margins of interpretation. This puts the issue in a kind of gray zone, which means that the Union is left behind due to the inability to intervene fully.
The conclusion is that selective discrimination is likely to run counter to the common objectives set out in the Treaties due to the exclusion of same-sex couples and their family members. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9034389
- author
- Subasic, Albin LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- When discrimination stands against justice
- course
- JURM02 20202
- year
- 2020
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- EU-rätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9034389
- date added to LUP
- 2021-02-04 12:02:30
- date last changed
- 2021-02-04 12:02:30
@misc{9034389,
abstract = {{This thesis is inspired by the societal development that is taking place before our eyes where, more and more same-sex relationships are added but are still left out due to their limited rights in free movement. The free movement of persons and their family members is one of the fundamental principles of the EU, and the right must therefore be comprehensive by giving all Union citizens and their family members the same opportunity for free movement. One consequence of the fact that the right is not extensive is that same-sex couples have a limited free movement as the outcome is highly dependent on the national law of the Member State in question, it is unpredictable which is not sought. Same-sex couples where both parties are citizens of the union can exercise their free movement as citizens of the Union, but once the transfer has taken place to the Member State, it is not guaranteed that a relationship can be formalized. Third-country nationals covered by the definition of family members in a same-sex relationship suffer the most, as they are unable to exercise their free movement as Union citizens and therefore have to rely entirely on the national law of the Member States to reside in that Member State.
Is is also interesting to see whether the current situation is compatible with the objectives of the Union or whether the common objectives of the Treaties are counteracted by the selective discrimination that takes place in those Member States that do not allow same-sex couples to formalize a relationship there.
The situation is very complex due to the Union´s limited competence in this area, on the one hand diversity is promoted but on the other hand it is difficult do restrict national legislation in this area due to unclear and not sufficiently strict margins of interpretation. This puts the issue in a kind of gray zone, which means that the Union is left behind due to the inability to intervene fully.
The conclusion is that selective discrimination is likely to run counter to the common objectives set out in the Treaties due to the exclusion of same-sex couples and their family members.}},
author = {{Subasic, Albin}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{När diskriminering står mot rättvisa - Hur begränsningen av samkönade partners fria rörlighet inom EU överensstämmer med unionens mål}},
year = {{2020}},
}