THE GREEK-TURKISH BORDER SITUATION, THE WESTERN BALKANS ROUTE
AND N.D.&N.T.
Prof. Dr. Iris Goldner Lang
Jean Monnet Professor of EU Law UNESCO Chair on Free Movement of People, Migration & Inter-Cultural Dialogue
DEVELOPMENTS AT THE GREEK-TURKISH BORDER
• On28/02/2020TurkeyannouncedthatitwouldnolongerstoprefugeesandmigrantstryingtocrosstheGreek-Turkishborder
• TheborderwasopenedonlyontheTurkishside• Followingweeks:tensofthousandsofpeoplegatheredontheTurkishsideoftheborder,afterhavingbeenreportedlytakentherebyTurkishbuses
• Greecedecidedtosuspendallasylumapplicationsforonemonth• VonderLeyenthankedGreeceasEurope’s“shield”inblockingtheentrytotheEUandpromisedfinancialandmaterialsupport,andthedeploymentofFrontex
• Numbersdecreased,partlysincetheyrealisedthattheywouldnotbeabletoentertheEUandpartlyduetothecoronaviruscrisis
2
STARTING POINTS
• ThedevelopmentsattheGreek-Turkishbordercanonlybeunderstoodastheresultoftheinteractionof4factors:Ø MSs’experienceoftheWBrouteandtheirfearofitsreoccurrenceØ fearofturningintohotspots(especiallyoffrontlineMSs)Ø judicialreactions:
Ø CJEUdecisionsonEU-TurkeydealandinA.S.andJafariØ ECtHR’sjudgmentinN.D.andN.T.
3
NF, NG & NM V. EUROPEAN COUNCIL GENERAL COURT
Ø TheCourtthereforeconsidersthatneithertheEuropeanCouncilnoranyotherinstitutionoftheEUdecidedtoconcludeanagreementwiththeTurkishGovernmentonthesubjectofthemigrationcrisis.IntheabsenceofanyactofaninstitutionoftheEU,thelegalityofwhichitcouldreviewunderArticle263TFEU,theCourtdeclaresthatitlacksjurisdictiontohearanddeterminetheactionsbroughtbythethreeasylumseekers.
4
ORDER OF THE CJEU (12/9/2018)
• Inthepresentcase,theappealsareincoherent• Theappealsarethereforeinadmissibleintheirentirety• Theappealmustbedismissedasmanifestlyinadmissible
5
CASES C-490/16 A.S. & C-646/16 JAFARI • In2016aSyriannationalandthemembersoftwoAfghanfamiliescrossedtheborderbetweenCroatiaandSerbia,eventhoughtheywerenotinpossessionofanappropriatevisa.TheCroatianauthoritiesorganisedtransportforthosepersonstotheCroatia-SloveniaborderwiththeaimofassistingtheminmovingontootherMemberStatesinordertomakeanapplicationforinternationalprotectionthere.
• TheSyriannationalmadesuchanapplicationinSlovenia,whereasthemembersoftheAfghanfamiliesdidsoinAustria.
• SloveniaandAustriatooktheviewthat,astheapplicantshadenteredCroatiaunlawfully,accordingtoDublinitwasfortheauthoritiesofthatMStoexaminetheirapplicationsforinternationalprotection.
6
A.S. & JAFARI - CJEU
Ø Croatiaisresponsibleforexaminingapplicationsforinternationalprotectionbypersonswhocrosseditsborderenmasseduringthe2015-2016migrationcrisis
Ø ThosepersonsmustberegardedashavingcrossedtheexternalborderofCroatiairregularlywithinthemeaningoftheDublinIIIRegulation
Ø AMSwhichhasdecidedonhumanitariangroundstoauthorisetheentryonitsterritoryofanon-EUnationalwhodoesnothaveavisaandisnotentitledtovisawaivercannotbeabsolvedoftheresponsibilitytoexaminetheasylumapplication
7
N.D & N.T. V. SPAIN • ImmediatereturntoMoroccooftwonationalsofMaliandCôted’IvoirewhoattemptedtoentertheSpanishterritoryfromMoroccobyclimbingthefencessurroundingMelilla,togetherwithtwogroupsofmorethan600individuals
• AstheyreachedtheSpanishground,theywereapprehendedbytheSpanishpolice,whohandcuffedthemandhandedthemovertotheMoroccanauthorities,withoutundertakinganyidentificationprocedureandwithoutenablingN.D.andN.T.toexplaintheirpersonalcircumstances
8
ECtHR: N.D & N.T. • TheapplicantschosenottomakeuseoftheofficialentryprocedurestoentertheSpanishterritorylawfully
• Instead,theytookadvantageofthefactthattheywerepartofalargegroupofindividualswhichusedforceinitsattempttocrosstheborderØ Thelackofindividualremovaldecisionscouldbeattributedtotheapplicants’unlawfulbehaviour
Ø NoviolationofArt.4ofProtocolNo.4(prohibitionofcollectiveexpulsion)andArt.13ECHR(righttoaneffectiveremedy)
9
ECtHR: N.D & N.T. • 2conditionsfordeterminingwhetherthesituationcanbeattributedas“theapplicant’sownbehaviour”:Ø whetherthestateprovides"genuineandeffectiveaccesstomeansoflegalentry,inparticularborderproceduresforthosewhohavearrivedattheborder”
Ø whetherthereisan"absenceofcogentreasonswhytheapplicantdidnotmakeuseofofficialentryprocedures,whichwerebasedonobjectivefactsforwhichtherespondentstatewasresponsible”
10
N.D & N.T. – OPEN ISSUES • EU–TurkeyStatement↔Stateresponsibilityinasituationwheretheapplicantdoesnotmakeuseoftheofficialentryprocedures
• DoestheECtHR’sevaluationofthelegalityofexpulsionapply:• onlytocaseswheremigrantsarriveenmasseoralsowheretheyarriveindividually?
• incasemigrantsdidnotuseforce,butjuststoodattheborder?
Ø WouldtheECtHR’sruledifferentlyincaseofanindividualattempttocrosstheborderwhichwasdevoidofanysecuritythreat?
Ø WhatcriteriawouldECtHRusetomeasuretheexistenceofsuchathreat?
11
CONCLUDING REMARKS
• WouldblockingmigrantsfromenteringGreecegetjudicialapproval,incaseofareferencetoECtHR?
• SignaltotheCJEU,shoulditbeconfrontedwithasimilarcase?
12
Copyright: Iris Goldner Lang This presentation is protected by copyright and its origin should be acknowledged in
any use made thereof.
Top Related