Informace o kvalifikační práci THE IMPACT OF COVID 19 RESPONSE (CLOSING ENTRY POINTS AND SUSPENSION OF ASYLUM APPLICATIONS) ON THE RIGHTS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND ASYLUM SEEKERS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: LEGALITY OF INVOKING ARTICLE 15 ECHR
- Všechny požadované údaje o této VŠKP jsou vyplněny.
Hlavní téma
THE IMPACT OF COVID 19 RESPONSE (CLOSING ENTRY POINTS AND SUSPENSION OF ASYLUM APPLICATIONS) ON THE RIGHTS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND ASYLUM SEEKERS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: LEGALITY OF INVOKING ARTICLE 15 ECHR
Hlavní téma v angličtině
THE IMPACT OF COVID 19 RESPONSE (CLOSING ENTRY POINTS AND SUSPENSION OF ASYLUM APPLICATIONS) ON THE RIGHTS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND ASYLUM SEEKERS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: LEGALITY OF INVOKING ARTICLE 15 ECHR
Název dle studenta
THE IMPACT OF COVID 19 RESPONSE (CLOSING ENTRY POINTS AND SUSPENSION OF ASYLUM APPLICATIONS) ON THE RIGHTS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND ASYLUM SEEKERS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: LEGALITY OF INVOKING ARTICLE 15 ECHR
Název dle studenta v angličtině
THE IMPACT OF COVID 19 RESPONSE (CLOSING ENTRY POINTS AND SUSPENSION OF ASYLUM APPLICATIONS) ON THE RIGHTS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND ASYLUM SEEKERS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: LEGALITY OF INVOKING ARTICLE 15 ECHR
The research examines the legality of the adoption of the derogation clause, i.e., Article 15 ECHR, by EU Member States in response to COVID-19 pandemic. Focus of the thesis will be on the impact of the COVID-19 measures on refugees and asylum seekers, adopted by the EU Member States, to close the entry points and suspend asylum applications. Due to the epidemic, very few migrants were able to cross the sea, transit routes in the inner Europe were blocked, leaving asylum seekers stuck in the disastrous camps along the EU external borders. This act of depriving the migrants their right to seek and enjoy asylum which is guaranteed to them by Article 18 Article of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has sent a contradictory message to the rest of the world as the EU prides itself to be a "guardian" of human rights. As the pandemic is a threat to public health, Member States adopted the derogation clause. Article 15(1) of the Convention provides that, "In time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation, any High Contracting Party may take measures derogating from its obligations under the Convention?" The Article goes on to place limitations to the application of the derogation clause by stating that derogation is only permissible, "? to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with its other obligations under international law." The paper discusses the Member States' obligations under international law which have been infringed by the adoption of the derogation clause. The necessity of the measures adopted and their proportionality to the current pandemic situation will be examined. The research aims to establish that alternative measures could have been established, like conducting tests and/or quarantine etc, which would not infringe the States obligations under international and EU law.
Anotace v angličtině
The research examines the legality of the adoption of the derogation clause, i.e., Article 15 ECHR, by EU Member States in response to COVID-19 pandemic. Focus of the thesis will be on the impact of the COVID-19 measures on refugees and asylum seekers, adopted by the EU Member States, to close the entry points and suspend asylum applications. Due to the epidemic, very few migrants were able to cross the sea, transit routes in the inner Europe were blocked, leaving asylum seekers stuck in the disastrous camps along the EU external borders. This act of depriving the migrants their right to seek and enjoy asylum which is guaranteed to them by Article 18 Article of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has sent a contradictory message to the rest of the world as the EU prides itself to be a "guardian" of human rights. As the pandemic is a threat to public health, Member States adopted the derogation clause. Article 15(1) of the Convention provides that, "In time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation, any High Contracting Party may take measures derogating from its obligations under the Convention?" The Article goes on to place limitations to the application of the derogation clause by stating that derogation is only permissible, "? to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with its other obligations under international law." The paper discusses the Member States' obligations under international law which have been infringed by the adoption of the derogation clause. The necessity of the measures adopted and their proportionality to the current pandemic situation will be examined. The research aims to establish that alternative measures could have been established, like conducting tests and/or quarantine etc, which would not infringe the States obligations under international and EU law.
Klíčová slova
The research examines the legality of the adoption of the derogation clause, i.e., Article 15 ECHR, by EU Member States in response to COVID-19 pandemic. Focus of the thesis will be on the impact of the COVID-19 measures on refugees and asylum seekers, adopted by the EU Member States, to close the entry points and suspend asylum applications. Due to the epidemic, very few migrants were able to cross the sea, transit routes in the inner Europe were blocked, leaving asylum seekers stuck in the disastrous camps along the EU external borders. This act of depriving the migrants their right to seek and enjoy asylum which is guaranteed to them by Article 18 Article of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has sent a contradictory message to the rest of the world as the EU prides itself to be a "guardian" of human rights. As the pandemic is a threat to public health, Member States adopted the derogation clause. Article 15(1) of the Convention provides that, "In time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation, any High Contracting Party may take measures derogating from its obligations under the Convention?" The Article goes on to place limitations to the application of the derogation clause by stating that derogation is only permissible, "? to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with its other obligations under international law." The paper discusses the Member States' obligations under international law which have been infringed by the adoption of the derogation clause. The necessity of the measures adopted and their proportionality to the current pandemic situation will be examined. The research aims to establish that alternative measures could have been established, like conducting tests and/or quarantine etc, which would not infringe the States obligations under international and EU law.
Klíčová slova v angličtině
The research examines the legality of the adoption of the derogation clause, i.e., Article 15 ECHR, by EU Member States in response to COVID-19 pandemic. Focus of the thesis will be on the impact of the COVID-19 measures on refugees and asylum seekers, adopted by the EU Member States, to close the entry points and suspend asylum applications. Due to the epidemic, very few migrants were able to cross the sea, transit routes in the inner Europe were blocked, leaving asylum seekers stuck in the disastrous camps along the EU external borders. This act of depriving the migrants their right to seek and enjoy asylum which is guaranteed to them by Article 18 Article of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has sent a contradictory message to the rest of the world as the EU prides itself to be a "guardian" of human rights. As the pandemic is a threat to public health, Member States adopted the derogation clause. Article 15(1) of the Convention provides that, "In time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation, any High Contracting Party may take measures derogating from its obligations under the Convention?" The Article goes on to place limitations to the application of the derogation clause by stating that derogation is only permissible, "? to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with its other obligations under international law." The paper discusses the Member States' obligations under international law which have been infringed by the adoption of the derogation clause. The necessity of the measures adopted and their proportionality to the current pandemic situation will be examined. The research aims to establish that alternative measures could have been established, like conducting tests and/or quarantine etc, which would not infringe the States obligations under international and EU law.
Rozsah průvodní práce
-
Jazyk
AN
Anotace
The research examines the legality of the adoption of the derogation clause, i.e., Article 15 ECHR, by EU Member States in response to COVID-19 pandemic. Focus of the thesis will be on the impact of the COVID-19 measures on refugees and asylum seekers, adopted by the EU Member States, to close the entry points and suspend asylum applications. Due to the epidemic, very few migrants were able to cross the sea, transit routes in the inner Europe were blocked, leaving asylum seekers stuck in the disastrous camps along the EU external borders. This act of depriving the migrants their right to seek and enjoy asylum which is guaranteed to them by Article 18 Article of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has sent a contradictory message to the rest of the world as the EU prides itself to be a "guardian" of human rights. As the pandemic is a threat to public health, Member States adopted the derogation clause. Article 15(1) of the Convention provides that, "In time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation, any High Contracting Party may take measures derogating from its obligations under the Convention?" The Article goes on to place limitations to the application of the derogation clause by stating that derogation is only permissible, "? to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with its other obligations under international law." The paper discusses the Member States' obligations under international law which have been infringed by the adoption of the derogation clause. The necessity of the measures adopted and their proportionality to the current pandemic situation will be examined. The research aims to establish that alternative measures could have been established, like conducting tests and/or quarantine etc, which would not infringe the States obligations under international and EU law.
Anotace v angličtině
The research examines the legality of the adoption of the derogation clause, i.e., Article 15 ECHR, by EU Member States in response to COVID-19 pandemic. Focus of the thesis will be on the impact of the COVID-19 measures on refugees and asylum seekers, adopted by the EU Member States, to close the entry points and suspend asylum applications. Due to the epidemic, very few migrants were able to cross the sea, transit routes in the inner Europe were blocked, leaving asylum seekers stuck in the disastrous camps along the EU external borders. This act of depriving the migrants their right to seek and enjoy asylum which is guaranteed to them by Article 18 Article of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has sent a contradictory message to the rest of the world as the EU prides itself to be a "guardian" of human rights. As the pandemic is a threat to public health, Member States adopted the derogation clause. Article 15(1) of the Convention provides that, "In time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation, any High Contracting Party may take measures derogating from its obligations under the Convention?" The Article goes on to place limitations to the application of the derogation clause by stating that derogation is only permissible, "? to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with its other obligations under international law." The paper discusses the Member States' obligations under international law which have been infringed by the adoption of the derogation clause. The necessity of the measures adopted and their proportionality to the current pandemic situation will be examined. The research aims to establish that alternative measures could have been established, like conducting tests and/or quarantine etc, which would not infringe the States obligations under international and EU law.
Klíčová slova
The research examines the legality of the adoption of the derogation clause, i.e., Article 15 ECHR, by EU Member States in response to COVID-19 pandemic. Focus of the thesis will be on the impact of the COVID-19 measures on refugees and asylum seekers, adopted by the EU Member States, to close the entry points and suspend asylum applications. Due to the epidemic, very few migrants were able to cross the sea, transit routes in the inner Europe were blocked, leaving asylum seekers stuck in the disastrous camps along the EU external borders. This act of depriving the migrants their right to seek and enjoy asylum which is guaranteed to them by Article 18 Article of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has sent a contradictory message to the rest of the world as the EU prides itself to be a "guardian" of human rights. As the pandemic is a threat to public health, Member States adopted the derogation clause. Article 15(1) of the Convention provides that, "In time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation, any High Contracting Party may take measures derogating from its obligations under the Convention?" The Article goes on to place limitations to the application of the derogation clause by stating that derogation is only permissible, "? to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with its other obligations under international law." The paper discusses the Member States' obligations under international law which have been infringed by the adoption of the derogation clause. The necessity of the measures adopted and their proportionality to the current pandemic situation will be examined. The research aims to establish that alternative measures could have been established, like conducting tests and/or quarantine etc, which would not infringe the States obligations under international and EU law.
Klíčová slova v angličtině
The research examines the legality of the adoption of the derogation clause, i.e., Article 15 ECHR, by EU Member States in response to COVID-19 pandemic. Focus of the thesis will be on the impact of the COVID-19 measures on refugees and asylum seekers, adopted by the EU Member States, to close the entry points and suspend asylum applications. Due to the epidemic, very few migrants were able to cross the sea, transit routes in the inner Europe were blocked, leaving asylum seekers stuck in the disastrous camps along the EU external borders. This act of depriving the migrants their right to seek and enjoy asylum which is guaranteed to them by Article 18 Article of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has sent a contradictory message to the rest of the world as the EU prides itself to be a "guardian" of human rights. As the pandemic is a threat to public health, Member States adopted the derogation clause. Article 15(1) of the Convention provides that, "In time of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation, any High Contracting Party may take measures derogating from its obligations under the Convention?" The Article goes on to place limitations to the application of the derogation clause by stating that derogation is only permissible, "? to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with its other obligations under international law." The paper discusses the Member States' obligations under international law which have been infringed by the adoption of the derogation clause. The necessity of the measures adopted and their proportionality to the current pandemic situation will be examined. The research aims to establish that alternative measures could have been established, like conducting tests and/or quarantine etc, which would not infringe the States obligations under international and EU law.
Zásady pro vypracování
BACKGROUND
Since early 2020, Europe, like the rest of the world, has seen the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. In response, all Member States of the Union have taken measures intending to curb the spread of the virus. The research examines the legality of the adoption of the derogation clause, i.e., Article 15 ECHR, by EU Member States in response to COVID-19 pandemic. Focus of the thesis will be on the impact of the COVID-19 measures on illegal immigrants and asylum seekers, adopted by the EU Member States, to close the entry points and suspend asylum applications. Due to the epidemic, very few migrants were able to cross the sea, transit routes in the inner Europe were blocked, leaving asylum seekers stuck in the disastrous camps along the EU external borders.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The current research contributes to the recognition of the rights of refugees and asylum seekers as essential to European Union law. It calls for a change in how the EU is applying its measures on refugees and asylum seekers in order to accommodate the group in the human rights protection policy. The research focuses on the predicaments facing this vulnerable group as a result of being denied access to enter the EU and seek international protection. Finally, it will recommend human rights approaches which should be considered and taken to ensure the EU protection of human rights.
OBJECTIVE OF THE RESEARCH
The primary aim of this thesis is as follows:
To indicate that the adoption of Article 15 ECHR infringes fundamental rights of refugees and asylum seekers
To create recommendations for EU COVID-19 policy that is of a more human rights approach to refugees and asylum seekers.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Main research question:
What is the impact of extending the adoption of Article 15 ECHR on refugees and asylum seekers?
Sub-research questions:
What is the role of EU in the protection of human rights of refugees and asylum seekers within the Union and beyond its external boarders amidst the COVID-19 pandemic?
Can the human rights affected by adopting Article 15 be derogated from?
What suggestions can be given to reform EU refugee policy to ensure human rights for refugees and asylum seekers during the crisis?
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This thesis will be conceived as a desk study, relying extensively on secondary sources. It is a qualitative research, which is useful in order to explain and analyze the research topic. Analytical approach will be useful to examine and comment on the impact of EU COVID-19 response on the migrants.
CHAPTER OUTLINES
Chapter 1: This chapter gives a brief introduction, background of the study, problem statement, an outline of the research aims and objectives, justification for the study and the methodology used in the research.
Chapter 2: This chapter is mainly focused on review of application of Article 15 ECHR. Case law will be thoroughly analyzed to establish the previous application of derogation from fundamental rights. There will be a critical appraisal of what other scholars have had to say on the effectiveness of EU human rights policy concerning refugees and asylum seekers.
Chapter 3: This Chapter is mainly focused on the EU human rights policy concerning illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. It will discuss the EU institutions and bodies responsible for each of the discussed policies. Article 15 ECHR will be analyzed, to determine whether the current crisis calls for the application of the derogation to the extent of the vulnerable group.
Chapter 4 : This chapter provides the conclusion of the research and recommendations on the research topic.
Zásady pro vypracování
BACKGROUND
Since early 2020, Europe, like the rest of the world, has seen the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. In response, all Member States of the Union have taken measures intending to curb the spread of the virus. The research examines the legality of the adoption of the derogation clause, i.e., Article 15 ECHR, by EU Member States in response to COVID-19 pandemic. Focus of the thesis will be on the impact of the COVID-19 measures on illegal immigrants and asylum seekers, adopted by the EU Member States, to close the entry points and suspend asylum applications. Due to the epidemic, very few migrants were able to cross the sea, transit routes in the inner Europe were blocked, leaving asylum seekers stuck in the disastrous camps along the EU external borders.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The current research contributes to the recognition of the rights of refugees and asylum seekers as essential to European Union law. It calls for a change in how the EU is applying its measures on refugees and asylum seekers in order to accommodate the group in the human rights protection policy. The research focuses on the predicaments facing this vulnerable group as a result of being denied access to enter the EU and seek international protection. Finally, it will recommend human rights approaches which should be considered and taken to ensure the EU protection of human rights.
OBJECTIVE OF THE RESEARCH
The primary aim of this thesis is as follows:
To indicate that the adoption of Article 15 ECHR infringes fundamental rights of refugees and asylum seekers
To create recommendations for EU COVID-19 policy that is of a more human rights approach to refugees and asylum seekers.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Main research question:
What is the impact of extending the adoption of Article 15 ECHR on refugees and asylum seekers?
Sub-research questions:
What is the role of EU in the protection of human rights of refugees and asylum seekers within the Union and beyond its external boarders amidst the COVID-19 pandemic?
Can the human rights affected by adopting Article 15 be derogated from?
What suggestions can be given to reform EU refugee policy to ensure human rights for refugees and asylum seekers during the crisis?
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This thesis will be conceived as a desk study, relying extensively on secondary sources. It is a qualitative research, which is useful in order to explain and analyze the research topic. Analytical approach will be useful to examine and comment on the impact of EU COVID-19 response on the migrants.
CHAPTER OUTLINES
Chapter 1: This chapter gives a brief introduction, background of the study, problem statement, an outline of the research aims and objectives, justification for the study and the methodology used in the research.
Chapter 2: This chapter is mainly focused on review of application of Article 15 ECHR. Case law will be thoroughly analyzed to establish the previous application of derogation from fundamental rights. There will be a critical appraisal of what other scholars have had to say on the effectiveness of EU human rights policy concerning refugees and asylum seekers.
Chapter 3: This Chapter is mainly focused on the EU human rights policy concerning illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. It will discuss the EU institutions and bodies responsible for each of the discussed policies. Article 15 ECHR will be analyzed, to determine whether the current crisis calls for the application of the derogation to the extent of the vulnerable group.
Chapter 4 : This chapter provides the conclusion of the research and recommendations on the research topic.
Seznam doporučené literatury
European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14, 4 November 1950, ETS 5
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 26 October 2012, 2012/C 326/02
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 10 December 1948, 217 A (III)
Member States Constitutions
Other relevant international and EU instruments
Applicable reports from various organizations like EU institutions and United Nations Publications from various analysts who give attention to International Human Rights law, EU Human Rights law, Immigration law, Refugee law and other related topics i.e.:
COSTELLO, Cathryn. The Human Rights of Migrants and Refugees in European Law. Oxford University Press, 2016
De VRIES, Sybe et al. The Protection of Fundamental Rights in the EU After Lisbon. Oxford, 2013
Information from journal publications, reports, news and newspaper articles will also be used
DONNELLY, Jack. Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice. Cornell University Press, Third Edition, 2013
GUILD, Elspeth, MITSILEGAS, Valsamis. Immigration and Asylum Law and Policy in Europe. Brill
PEERS, Steve, et al. EU Immigration and Asylum Law (Text and Commentary): Second Revised Edition, Volume 3, 2015
PEERS, Steve, et al. The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: A Commentary. Hart/Beck, Oxford 2004
PEERS, Steve, et al. The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Politics, Law and Policy. Oxford, 2004
SHAW, Malcom. International LAW. Cambridge University Press, Eighth Edition, 2018
Seznam doporučené literatury
European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14, 4 November 1950, ETS 5
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 26 October 2012, 2012/C 326/02
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 10 December 1948, 217 A (III)
Member States Constitutions
Other relevant international and EU instruments
Applicable reports from various organizations like EU institutions and United Nations Publications from various analysts who give attention to International Human Rights law, EU Human Rights law, Immigration law, Refugee law and other related topics i.e.:
COSTELLO, Cathryn. The Human Rights of Migrants and Refugees in European Law. Oxford University Press, 2016
De VRIES, Sybe et al. The Protection of Fundamental Rights in the EU After Lisbon. Oxford, 2013
Information from journal publications, reports, news and newspaper articles will also be used
DONNELLY, Jack. Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice. Cornell University Press, Third Edition, 2013
GUILD, Elspeth, MITSILEGAS, Valsamis. Immigration and Asylum Law and Policy in Europe. Brill
PEERS, Steve, et al. EU Immigration and Asylum Law (Text and Commentary): Second Revised Edition, Volume 3, 2015
PEERS, Steve, et al. The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: A Commentary. Hart/Beck, Oxford 2004
PEERS, Steve, et al. The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Politics, Law and Policy. Oxford, 2004
SHAW, Malcom. International LAW. Cambridge University Press, Eighth Edition, 2018