Refugees Without Refuge: Roma, Internal Bordering, and Protection Gaps in Europe

Nistor, Maria-Ecaterina

4. semester

International Relations, MSc.

2026

2026-05-28

70

This thesis examines whether the Common European Asylum System (CEAS)—the EU’s rules for handling asylum claims—can protect EU citizens who face long-term, structural discrimination and marginalization, with a special focus on Roma communities. Structural discrimination refers to inequalities embedded in laws, institutions, and social patterns over time. The thesis shows that Roma have historically faced persecution, exclusion, forced displacement, slavery, segregation, and racialized governance, and that many still experience persistent inequalities in housing, education, health, and employment. This highlights a gap between formal rights and real access to protection. The analysis explains that international refugee law adopts a broad view of persecution: harm is not limited to direct violence and can include persistent discrimination, socioeconomic exclusion, and lack of effective state protection. The refugee definition can therefore, in principle, cover situations where long-term discrimination undermines a dignified life. At the same time, the CEAS has important limitations. Principles such as mutual trust (the assumption that EU countries respect rights), the safe country of origin doctrine, and Protocol No. 24 (a special EU rule on asylum for EU nationals) create strong presumptions that member states are safe and able to protect their own citizens. This shapes how asylum applications from EU citizens are handled and can mean that structural harm is not fully examined in practice. Case law shows, however, that these presumptions are not absolute: decisions such as M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece and a ruling by the Bologna court indicate that courts can depart from assumptions of safety when there is evidence of serious protection failures or conditions incompatible with fundamental rights. In conclusion, the thesis finds that the CEAS can, in theory, recognize protection claims based on structural discrimination within the EU, but that procedural presumptions create significant practical barriers. This reveals a core tension in the European project: strong formal commitments to equality and human rights coexisting with persistent structural inequalities that limit access to effective protection.

Afhandlingen undersøger, om det fælles europæiske asylsystem (CEAS) – EU's regler for behandling af asylansøgninger – kan beskytte EU-borgere, der udsættes for langvarig, strukturel diskrimination og marginalisering, med særligt fokus på romaer. Strukturel diskrimination forstås som uligheder indlejret i love, institutioner og samfundsmønstre over tid. Afhandlingen viser, at romaer historisk har været udsat for forfølgelse, eksklusion, tvangsforflyttelser, slaveri, segregation og racialiseret styring, og at mange stadig oplever uligheder i bolig, uddannelse, sundhed og arbejde. Det peger på en kløft mellem formelle rettigheder og reel adgang til beskyttelse. Analysen forklarer, at international flygtningeret har en bred forståelse af forfølgelse: Skade kan være mere end direkte vold og omfatte vedvarende diskrimination, socioøkonomisk eksklusion og manglende effektiv beskyttelse fra staten. Flygtningedefinitionen kan derfor i princippet omfatte situationer, hvor langvarig diskrimination undergraver et værdigt liv. Samtidig fremhæves begrænsninger i CEAS. Principper som gensidig tillid (antagelsen om at EU-lande respekterer rettigheder), doktrinen om sikre oprindelseslande og Protokol nr. 24 (en særlig EU-regel om asyl for EU-borgere) skaber stærke formodninger om, at medlemsstater er sikre og kan beskytte egne borgere. Det påvirker behandlingen af asylansøgninger fra EU-borgere og kan betyde, at strukturel skade ikke undersøges fuldt ud. Retspraksis viser dog, at formodningerne ikke er absolutte: Afgørelser som M.S.S. mod Belgien og Grækenland samt en kendelse fra Bologna-domstolen viser, at domstole kan fravige antagelser om sikkerhed, når der er beviser for alvorlige beskyttelsessvigt eller forhold uforenelige med grundlæggende rettigheder. Afslutningsvis konkluderer afhandlingen, at CEAS i teorien kan anerkende beskyttelseskrav baseret på strukturel diskrimination inden for EU, men at de proceduremæssige antagelser udgør betydelige praktiske barrierer. Det synliggør en grundlæggende spænding i det europæiske projekt: stærke formelle forpligtelser til lighed og menneskerettigheder eksisterer side om side med vedvarende uligheder, der begrænser adgang til effektiv beskyttelse.

[This apstract has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]

Roma ; refugee law ; Common European Asylum System (CEAS) ; structural discrimination ; persecution ; Roma exclusion ; EU citizenship ; mutual trust ; afe country of origin ; international protection ; human rights ; marginalization ; structural violence ; internal bordering ; racialized governance ; conditional citizenship

Download PDF
View record in AAU Student Projects