Three Case Studies on Migration-Related Detention
Abstract
The European Union (EU) has recently adopted a series of legal and policy instruments and actions to strengthen protections from various forms of arbitrary asylum- and return-related detention. Further measures are planned, including those with potentially binding legal effects for EU Member States. Such laws and measures—intended to protect asylum seekers and other migrants from arbitrary deprivation of their liberty—involve rather abstract and ambiguous concepts that leave broad margins for legal interpretation and, consequently, a high degree of flexibility and discretionary powers to EU Member States. Therefore, the actual meaning and impact of these provisions is difficult to grasp. This research critically examines the latest jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU or Court) on the (alleged) incidents and practices of arbitrary detention of migrants in EU Member States. It analyses how the supreme judicial authority of the EU construes the concept of ‘arbitrariness’ of deprivation of liberty of person and related notions, such as ‘necessity’ and ‘proportionality’, within the context of EU migration governance and the functioning Common European Asylum System. This analysis can give a preview of where the EU legislator and Court may be heading in terms of their quest for a more humane, dignified, and fair treatment in restricting migrants’ liberty. It also yields some valuable insights into the ways in and extent to which the interpretations and decisions of the CJEU uphold the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of liberty of migrants and uniform international human rights norms—including those enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights—that EU Member States are bound by when depriving migrants of their personal liberty.
References
Angeli, D., Anagnostou, D. (2022) ‘A Shortfall of Rights and Justice: Judicial Review of Immigration Detention in Greece’, European Journal of Legal Studies, 14(SI), pp. 97–131 [Online]. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/1814/74463 (Accessed: 15 September 2023).
Bombay, A., Heynen, P. (2021) ‘The ECtHR’s Ilias and Ahmed and the CJEU’s FMS-case: a difficult reconciliation?’, Sui generis, 2021(255); https://doi.org/10.21257/sg.189.
Callewaert, J. (2020) ‘Detention of asylum seekers in the Röszke transit zone: judgment by the CJEU in the case of FMS and Others’, Prof. Dr. iur. Johan Callewaert blog, 26 June [Online]. Available at: https://johan-callewaert.eu/detention-of-asylum-seekers-in-the-roszke-transit-zone-judgment-by-thecjeu-in-the-case-of-fms-and-others/ (Accessed: 19 January 2024).
Cornelisse, G. (2020) ‘Borders, Procedures and Rights at Röszke: Reflections on Case C-924/19 (PPU)’, European Database of Asylum Law, 9 April [Online]. Available at: https://www.asylumlawdatabase.eu/en/journal/bordersprocedures-and-rights-r%C3%B6szke-reflections-case-c-92419-ppu (Accessed: 20 January 2024).
European Commission (2017) Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/2338 of 16 November 2017 establishing a common ‘Return Handbook’ to be used by Member States’ complement authorities when carrying out return-related tasks.
European Commission (2020) Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on asylum and migration management and amending Council Directive (EC)2003/109 and the proposed Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Fund], COM(2020) 610 final.
European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) (2017) ‘Detention of asylum seekers in Europe: Constructed on shaky ground?’, Asylum Information Database (AIDA).
European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) (2018) ‘Boundaries of liberty: Asylum and de facto detention in Europe’, Asylum Information Database (AIDA).
Imbert, L. (2022) ‘Endorsing Migration Policies in Constitutional Terms: The Case of the French Constitutional Council’, European Journal of Legal Studies, 14(SI), pp. 63–95; https://doi.org/10.2924/EJLS.2022.003.
Majcher, I., Flynn, M., Grange, M. (2020) Immigration Detention in the European Union: In the Shadow of the “Crisis”. Cham: Springer; https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33869-5.
Meikle, C. (ed.) (2021) Reception, detention and restriction of movement at EU external borders. Brussels: European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE), Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung European Union. [Online]. Available at: https://ecre.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/ECRE-Heinrich-Boll-StiftungReception-Detention-and-Restriction-of-Movement-at-EU-External-Borders-July-2021.pdf (Accessed: 20 January 2024).
Mentzelopoulou, M. M., Barlaoura, N. (2023) ‘Detention of migrants: A measure of last resort,’ Briefing, European Parliamentary Research Service, September [Online]. Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2023/753926/EPRS_BRI(2023)753926_EN.pdf (Accessed: 15 September 2023).
Moraru, M., Janku, L. (2021) ‘Czech Litigation on Systematic Detention of Asylum Seekers: Ripple Effects across Europe’, European Journal of Migration and Law, 23(3), pp. 284–307; https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340103 (Accessed: 15 September 2023).
Peers, S. (2024) ‘The New EU Asylum Laws, part 2: the Reception Conditions Directive’, EU Law Analysis, 1 January [Online]. Available at: https://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2024/01/the-new-eu-asylum-laws-part-2-reception.html (Accessed: 20 January 2024).
Raimondo, G. (2022) ‘Against Arbitrariness: Defining the Grounds for Detention of Irregular Migrants (I. L. v Politsei- ja Piirivalveamet, C-241/21)’, EU Law Live, 2022, pp. 1–3 [Online]. Available at: https://orbilu.uni.lu/bitstream/10993/52696/1/Raimondo%20_%20Analysis%20_%2026.10.2022.pdf (Accessed: 15 September 2023).
Stoyanova, V. (2019) ‘The Grand Chamber Judgment in Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary: Immigration Detention and How the Ground Beneath Our Feet Continues to Erode’, Strasbourg Observers, 23 December [Online]. Available at: https://strasbourgobservers.com/2019/12/23/the-grand-chamber-judgmentin-ilias-and-ahmed-v-hungary-immigration-detention-and-how-theground-beneath-our-feet-continues-to-erode/ (Accessed: 19 January 2024).
Tsourdi, E. L. (2020) ‘Alternatives to Immigration Detention in International and EU Law: Control Standards and Judicial Interaction in a Heterarchy’ in Moraru, M., Cornelisse, G., De Bruycker, P. (eds.) Law and Judicial Dialogue on the Return of Irregular Migrants from the European Union. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 167–190; https://doi.org/10.5040/9781509922987.ch-007.
United Nations (2013) ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, François Crépeau. Regional study: management of the external borders of the European Union and its impact on the human rights of migrants’ United Nations General Assembly, 24 April [Online]. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session23/A.HRC.23.46_en.pdf (Accessed: 15 September 2023).
United Nations (2016) ‘Report of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention on its follow-up visit to Malta’, United Nations General Assembly, 7 October [Online]. Available at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/850281?v=pdf(Accessed: 15 September 2023).
WHO Regional Office for Europe (2022) ‘Addressing the health challenges in immigration detention, and alternatives to detention: a country implementation guide’. WHO, 2022 [Online]. Available at: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/353569/9789289057929-eng.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y (Accessed: 15 September 2023).
