Vše

Co hledáte?

Vše
Projekty
Výsledky výzkumu
Subjekty

Rychlé hledání

  • Projekty podpořené TA ČR
  • Významné projekty
  • Projekty s nejvyšší státní podporou
  • Aktuálně běžící projekty

Chytré vyhledávání

  • Takto najdu konkrétní +slovo
  • Takto z výsledků -slovo zcela vynechám
  • “Takto můžu najít celou frázi”

Judicial Dialogue in Action: Making Sense of the Risk of Absconding in the Return Procedure

Identifikátory výsledku

  • Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14220%2F20%3A00115134" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14220/20:00115134 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Výsledek na webu

    <a href="https://is.muni.cz/publication/1581938/cs/Judicial-Dialogue-in-Action-Making-Sense-of-the-Risk-of-Absconding-in-the-Return-Procedure/Bianca-Moraru?vysledek=94278" target="_blank" >https://is.muni.cz/publication/1581938/cs/Judicial-Dialogue-in-Action-Making-Sense-of-the-Risk-of-Absconding-in-the-Return-Procedure/Bianca-Moraru?vysledek=94278</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

Alternativní jazyky

  • Jazyk výsledku

    angličtina

  • Název v původním jazyce

    Judicial Dialogue in Action: Making Sense of the Risk of Absconding in the Return Procedure

  • Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

    The concept of ‘risk of absconding’ has been introduced as a ground for immigration detention since 2008. Notwithstanding the abundant literature on immigration detention and the increasing European courts’ jurisprudence assessing the lawfulness of such measures at the domestic level, the substantive meaning of the term still appears “nebulous”. The purpose of this article is to shed light on its elements through a close examination of domestic and CJEU jurisprudence. It will be shown that the choices of State legislature have mostly been led by protectionist objectives, broadly defining the term, leading in several cases, particularly during the 2015 migration crisis, to systemic and arbitrary pre-removal detention. However, national courts are slowly but steadily starting to prioritise the EU general principles of legal certainty, individual assessment and proportionality, and fundamental rights protection when assessing the notion of ‘the risk of absconding’. Nevertheless, the interpretation and application of the ‘risk of absconding’ still poses difficulties for national courts. The Commission’s proposal for a recast of the Return Directive, while remedying one of the previous problems in the definition of the ‘risk of absconding’ – lack of definition of ‘objective criteria’ for assessing the risk of absconding, it nonetheless encourages wide spread use of pre-removal detention. In this context, the chapter analyses the contribution of judicial dialogue to ensuring respect for EU general principles of legality, certainty, proportionality, individual assessment and respect of irregular migrants’ fundamental rights.

  • Název v anglickém jazyce

    Judicial Dialogue in Action: Making Sense of the Risk of Absconding in the Return Procedure

  • Popis výsledku anglicky

    The concept of ‘risk of absconding’ has been introduced as a ground for immigration detention since 2008. Notwithstanding the abundant literature on immigration detention and the increasing European courts’ jurisprudence assessing the lawfulness of such measures at the domestic level, the substantive meaning of the term still appears “nebulous”. The purpose of this article is to shed light on its elements through a close examination of domestic and CJEU jurisprudence. It will be shown that the choices of State legislature have mostly been led by protectionist objectives, broadly defining the term, leading in several cases, particularly during the 2015 migration crisis, to systemic and arbitrary pre-removal detention. However, national courts are slowly but steadily starting to prioritise the EU general principles of legal certainty, individual assessment and proportionality, and fundamental rights protection when assessing the notion of ‘the risk of absconding’. Nevertheless, the interpretation and application of the ‘risk of absconding’ still poses difficulties for national courts. The Commission’s proposal for a recast of the Return Directive, while remedying one of the previous problems in the definition of the ‘risk of absconding’ – lack of definition of ‘objective criteria’ for assessing the risk of absconding, it nonetheless encourages wide spread use of pre-removal detention. In this context, the chapter analyses the contribution of judicial dialogue to ensuring respect for EU general principles of legality, certainty, proportionality, individual assessment and respect of irregular migrants’ fundamental rights.

Klasifikace

  • Druh

    C - Kapitola v odborné knize

  • CEP obor

  • OECD FORD obor

    50501 - Law

Návaznosti výsledku

  • Projekt

  • Návaznosti

    I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Ostatní

  • Rok uplatnění

    2020

  • Kód důvěrnosti údajů

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku

  • Název knihy nebo sborníku

    Law and Judicial Dialogue on the Return of Irregular Migrants from the European Union

  • ISBN

    9781509922956

  • Počet stran výsledku

    25

  • Strana od-do

    125-149

  • Počet stran knihy

    528

  • Název nakladatele

    Hart

  • Místo vydání

    UK

  • Kód UT WoS kapitoly