JournalTOCs

European Journal of Migration and Law
Journal Prestige (SJR): 0.337

Citation Impact (citeScore): 1
Number of Followers: 37

Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
ISSN (Print) 1388-364X - ISSN (Online) 1571-8166
Published by Brill Academic Publishers

[229 journals]

Institutional Models under Directive 2014/54: Advantages and Disadvantages
for Free Movement of Workers and their Family Members
- Authors: Lyra Jakulevičienė; Regina Valutytė Inga Daukšienė
  First page: 223
  Abstract: Source: Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 223 - 250Despite many efforts to empower the EU citizens and their family members to benefit from the free movement of workers, numerous well-documented obstacles are still present within the EU. The EU intends to eliminate the gap between the rights on paper and in practice in Directive 2014/54 by establishing four procedural pillars—promotion, support, analysis and monitoring. The functions are entrusted to the institution(s) designated by the Member States leaving them a wide discretion to choose the most appropriate institutional model. This article focuses on the analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of three possible institutional setups—establishment of a new institution, extension of the mandate of an existing body and assignment of the tasks to several existing national bodies. The study examines which model is more suitable to meet the aims of the Directive, taking into consideration the nature and content of the abovementioned pillars and specific situation in the different Member States.
  PubDate: 2018-09-12T00:00:00Z
The Right to Family Reunion vs Integration Conditions for Third-Country
Nationals
- Authors: Patrycja Dąbrowska-Kłosińska
  First page: 251
  Abstract: Source: Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 251 - 288The article explores the approach of the Court of Justice of the European Union to the clash between the fundamental right to family reunion and the powers of Member States to protect national identity as a manifestation of sovereignty. The recent case-law pertinent to national measures imposing pre-entry, integration conditions on foreigners and the latter rights under the Directive 2006/83/EC (‘FRD’) on the right of third-country nationals to family reunion provides a basis for the analysis. The aim of this article is to establish and appraise the Court’s approach to the conflict in question. My claim is that the CJEU should have been more restrictive in its reasoning regarding the pre-entry integration measures, and that its interpretation based on individual assessment, proportionality principle and effet utile may not be sufficient for a scrutiny of national powers under FRD. I thus argue that the Court should be more proactive to provide a constitutional, contextual and systemic interpretation of the right to family reunion under the FRD, Article 7 and 24 of the EU Charter and the EU migration law system.
  PubDate: 2018-09-12T00:00:00Z
Family Reunification between Static EU Citizens and Third Country
Nationals
- Authors: Chiara Berneri
  First page: 289
  Abstract: Source: Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 289 - 313According to the available data, the number of refugees worldwide has recently exceeded 50 million people. Europe in particular has become the place to which immigrants direct themselves in search of a better life. Numerous have been the efforts at EU level to introduce new legal channels of immigration. Within these efforts, family reunification has not been thoroughly explored by the EU as a tangible way to provide an alternative legal pathway to asylum.The scope of this work is to link family reunification between static EU citizens and third country nationals to the current European immigration background in order to appreciate it as a way to channel safe immigration. This article will first give an overview of where we stand today in terms of the protection of this kind of family looking at data and case law. It will then focus on the reasons why a further enhancement of this tool is desirable and how it can be achieved in a concrete fashion. In particular, it will argue that a broader reading of the concept of emotional dependency, within the broader application of Zambrano, should be applied to further benefit families involved in the current refugee crisis.
  PubDate: 2018-09-12T00:00:00Z
The Unintended Legal and Policy Relevance of EU Mobility Partnerships
- Authors: Fanny Tittel-Mosser
  First page: 314
  Abstract: Source: Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 314 - 337The Mobility Partnerships between the European Union and third countries have a negative image as they are often viewed as a tool of migration control rather than a flexible instrument to enhance mobility. Yet so far scholars have predominantly investigated the asymmetric negotiation of Mobility Partnerships as well as their limited consequences for migrant rights in EU Member States. What is often overlooked is that these partnerships can also influence the development of the legal and policy frameworks of third countries in ways that go beyond what is foreseen at the time of the negotiation of the instruments. This article combines a comparative legal analysis of the development of the legal frameworks in Morocco and Cape Verde with an empirical study of the implementation of Mobility Partnerships’ projects in relation to national migration strategies. The analysis demonstrates that Mobility Partnerships, despite their non-binding nature, have legal and policy relevance for these third countries with regard to the regulation of migration, asylum, human trafficking and even labour law.
  PubDate: 2018-09-12T00:00:00Z
Impartiality in the EU Asylum Procedure
- Authors: Pieter van Reenen
  First page: 338
  Abstract: Source: Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 338 - 356The Asylum Procedures Directive stipulates that asylum applications are examined ‘impartially’ by the national authorities. This paper explores the meaning of the term impartiality in administrative settings in EU asylum law focussing on three levels: the Common European Asylum System, the administrative organisational level and the level of the individual immigration officer. CEAS does not provide for a definition of impartiality. The article connects impartiality to the right to good administration as in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. It includes jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights as well as the approach of the EU Ombudsman and EASO in its scope. These sources provide more concrete aspects of impartiality. The article is finalized with recommendations for a code of conduct.
  PubDate: 2018-09-12T00:00:00Z
Court of Justice of the European Union (Seventh Chamber) ()
- Authors: Bjarney Friðriksdóttir
  First page: 357
  Abstract: Source: Volume 20, Issue 3, pp 357 - 363This case report provides an account of the issues addressed in the preliminary ruling of the CJEU in Martinez Silva vs. Italy. The case centres on the limitations Member States of the European Union are permitted to apply in granting third-country nationals in employment equal treatment with nationals in social security rights according to Directive 2011/98/EU (the Single Permit Directive). Additionally, the preliminary ruling of the Court is discussed is discussed in the context of the human rights principle of equal treatment as it is enshrined in EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and International Labour Law.
  PubDate: 2018-09-12T00:00:00Z