(magistrsko delo)
Manja Hubman (Author), Saša Zagorc (Mentor)

Abstract

Z namenom doseganja skupnega evropskega azilnega sistema je bilo treba na supranacionalni ravni vzpostaviti mehanizem za delitev pristojnosti med državami članicami EU na področju mednarodne zaščite. Ključ za porazdelitev prosilcev za mednarodno zaščito določa Dublinska uredba, ki vzpostavlja hierarhijo meril za določanje pristojne države članice za vsebinsko obravnavo prošnje za mednarodno zaščito na način, da je za odločanje o posamezni prošnji pristojna ena sama država članica. Z upoštevanjem meril poizkuša primarno zagotoviti enotnost družine in največjo otrokovo korist, sekundarno pristojnost države članice, ki je prosilcu izdala dovoljenje za prebivanje ali vizum ter nenazadnje določa presojo kriterija nezakonitega vstopa v državo članico EU iz tretje države, ki se v praksi uporablja najpogosteje. Kadar pristojne države članice ni mogoče določiti na podlagi navedenih meril, je pristojna država članica v kateri je prosilec prvič zaprosil za mednarodno zaščito. Dublinski sistem natančno ureja postopek določanja pristojne države članice ter izročitve prosilca, v zvezi s katerim se je razvila obsežna sodna praksa ESČP in Sodišča EU. Poglavitna cilja Dublinskega sistema sta bila zagotoviti hiter dostop do mednarodne zaščite prosilcem ter preprečevanje pojava sekundarnega gibanja in »asylum shoppinga«, ki pa se nista uresničila. Mehanizem je zato neučinkovit in negativno vpliva na zaščito prosilcev ter spoštovanje mednarodnih ter EU standardov, dodatno pa ustvarja nesorazmerno porazdelitev odgovornosti med državami članicami EU. Kot njegova glavna alternativa je bil vzpostavljen mehanizem premestitev, ki predstavlja zgolj ad hoc rešitev. Sistemske pomanjkljivosti Dublinske uredbe so se v večjem obsegu pokazale predvsem ob povečanem migracijskem toku v EU leta 2015, s katerim se EU spopada še danes.

Keywords

mednarodna zaščita;Dublinska uredba;pristojnost;Evropska unija;EU;države članice;človekove pravice;prošnja za mednarodno zaščito;skupni evropski azilni sistem;azil;prosilci za azil;azilna politika;azilno pravo;migracije;migracijska politika;mednarodne migracije;magistrske diplomske naloge;

Data

Language: Slovenian
Year of publishing:
Typology: 2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization: UL PF - Faculty of Law
Publisher: [M. Hubman]
UDC: 341.43(4-6EU)(043.2)
COBISS: 15905361 Link will open in a new window
Views: 1658
Downloads: 630
Average score: 0 (0 votes)
Metadata: JSON JSON-RDF JSON-LD TURTLE N-TRIPLES XML RDFA MICRODATA DC-XML DC-RDF RDF

Other data

Secondary language: English
Secondary title: Responsibility of a state to examine an application for international protection
Secondary abstract: With the intention of achieving a Common European Asylum System, a mechanism determining responsible Member State in the field of international protection had to be established at supranational level. The key for distribution of applicants for international protection is institutionalised in the Dublin Regulation, which establishes a hierarchy of criteria that specifiy the responsible Member State to decide on the merits of the case regarding international protection, in a way that a single Member State has the authority to decide about an individual application. Abiding by the standard, it primarily seeks to secure family unity and the principle of the best interest of the child. Secondary it strives to assure responsibility of a Member State, which issued the applicants' residence documents or visa, and, ultimately, the assessment of the criterion of illegal entry to an EU Member State from a third country, which is most commonly used in practice. Whenever it can not be determined which Member State has the responsibility considering stated criteria, the responsibility lies in the hands of the Member State in which the applicant proposed for international protection for the first time. The Dublin system specifies the procedure for determining the responsible Member State and the extradition of the applicant, in relation to which extensive case law of the ECHR and CJEU was established. The main goals of the Dublin system were to ensure quick access to international protection and to prevent the occurrence of the phenomenon of secondary movement and asylum shopping, which did not realize. The mechanism is therefore inefficient and has a negative impact on the protection of applicants for the international protection and respect of international and EU standards, additionally it creates a disproportionate distribution of responsibility among EU Member States. The relocation mechanism was established as the main alternative to the Dublin system, but it represents only an ad hoc solution. Systemic imperfections of the system have been largely demonstrated especially by the increased migration flow in the EU in the year 2015, with which the EU is still confronting today.
Secondary keywords: international protection;Dublin Regulation;responsibility;European Union;Member States;human rights;application for international protection;Common European Asylum System;
Type (COBISS): Master's thesis/paper
Study programme: 0
Embargo end date (OpenAIRE): 1970-01-01
Thesis comment: Univ. v Ljubljani, Pravna fak.
Pages: 70 f.
ID: 10914994