The Common European Asylum System: the (un)intended consequences of earlier decisions

Houlding, Ellen Maretta

4. term

Culture, Communication and Globalization, Master

2017

2017-05-31

98

Mellem 2011 og 2016 søgte over fire millioner mennesker asyl i EU-28. I forhold til Unionens 508 millioner indbyggere er det omkring 1%. Alligevel blev perioden bredt omtalt som en 'migrantkrise', og EU havde svært ved at håndtere situationen. Stigningen i 2015 lagde institutionerne under ekstremt pres; 'sekundære bevægelser' (at folk rejser videre mellem EU-lande efter første indrejse) satte Schengen-området (pasfri rejse) under pres og skabte tvivl om medlemsstaternes evne og vilje til at opfylde EU-forpligtelser. Specialet argumenterer for, at problemet ikke primært var antallet, men en krise i den europæiske asylpolitik. Den relativt lille andel af ansøgere sammenlignet med EU’s befolkning rejser spørgsmål om, hvorvidt det Fælles Europæiske Asylsystem (CEAS) var egnet til formålet. Undersøgelsen kombinerer policyanalyse med deltagerobservation (feltarbejde) i flygtningelejren Alexandreia i Grækenland. Den finder, at EU systematisk anvender en tvangspræget tilgang, hvor udelukkelse, marginalisering og tungt bureaukrati er centrale. Denne tilgang udspringer af, hvordan EU konstruerer 'flygtning'-betegnelsen: antagelsen om, at asylansøgere er personer, der flygter fra forfølgelse og derfor ikke burde have præferencer for, hvor de modtager beskyttelse. Netop denne antagelse svækkede politikrammen og bidrog til dens sammenbrud. I dette perspektiv var den såkaldte migrantkrise et resultat af EU’s asylacquis, det samlede regelsæt på asylområdet, snarere end af tilstrømningens størrelse alene.

Between 2011 and 2016, more than four million people applied for asylum in the EU-28—about 1% of the Union’s 508 million inhabitants. Yet this period was widely framed as a 'migrant crisis,' and the EU struggled to respond effectively. The 2015 surge put institutions under extreme pressure; 'secondary movements' (people moving between EU countries after first entry) put the Schengen area (passport-free travel) at risk and raised doubts about Member States’ ability and willingness to meet EU obligations. This thesis argues that the problem was not primarily the numbers but a crisis of European asylum policy. The relatively small share of applicants, compared with the EU’s population, calls into question whether the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) was fit for purpose. The study combines policy analysis with participant observation (fieldwork) at the Alexandreia refugee camp in Greece. It finds that the EU systematically applies a coercive approach in which exclusion, marginalisation, and heavy bureaucracy are central. This approach stems from how the EU constructs the 'refugee' label: the assumption that asylum seekers are individuals fleeing persecution and therefore should not care where they receive protection. That assumption weakened the policy framework and contributed to its breakdown. In this view, the so-called migrant crisis resulted from the EU’s asylum acquis—the body of EU asylum law—rather than from the scale of arrivals alone.

[This abstract was generated with the help of AI]

EU ; CEAS ; Greece ; migrant crisis ; refugee camp

Download
View record in AAU Student Projects