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
—