Did the Court of Justice Open a Gateway to Europe for Refugees? Analysis of the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in EZ v. Bundesrepublik Deutschland (C-238/19)

Anna Magdalena Kosińska

Abstract


In the judgment in question, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for the first time ever carried out such broad interpretation of Article 9 (2) (2) (e) of Directive 2011/95/EU in the context of non-formalized refusal to perform military service by a young Syrian who escaped from his country of origin. The paper analyses the impact of the CJEU judgment on the functioning of the guarantee of the right to conscientious objection to military service within the EU asylum law. It also asks two key questions. First, in the light of the analysed judgment, should any potential Syrian conscript who in reality does not support the government (non-opportunist) and who evades military service be granted protection? Secondly, do all Syrian conscripts who join the army make themselves subject in the future to automatic exclusion from protection?


Keywords


protection; refugees; Directive 2011/95/EU; right to conscientious objection to military service; CJEU

Full Text:

PDF

References


LITERATURE

Bailliet C.M., Assessing jus ad bellum and jus in bello within the refugee status determination process: Contemplations on conscientious objectors seeking asylum, “Georgetown Immigration Law Journal” 2006, vol. 20.

Bielecki M., Odmowa pełnienia służby wojskowej przez Świadków Jehowy jako realizacja klauzuli sumienia. Uwarunkowania prawno-historyczne, “Studia z Prawa Wyznaniowego” 2016, vol. 19.

Bojarski Ł., Hofbauer J.A., Mileszyk N., The Charter of Fundamental Rights as a Living Instrument: Guidelines for Civil Society, Rome–Warsaw–Vienna 2014.

Boven T. van, Categories of Rights in International Human Rights Law, [in:] International Human Rights Law, eds. D. Moeckli, S. Shah, S. Sivakumaran, Oxford 2010.

Chetail V., International Migration Law, New York 2019.

Chlebny J., Ochrona sądowa w sprawach dotyczących osób ubiegających się o nadanie statusu uchodźcy – doświadczenia i perspektywy, “Miscellanea Iuris Gentium, Cracoviae A.D. MMIV” 2004, no. 7.

Chlebny J., Postępowanie w sprawie o nadanie statusu uchodźcy, Warszawa 2011.

Çınar Ö.H., Conscientious objection to military service, [in:] Conscientious Objection to Military Service in International Human Rights Law, New York 2013, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137366085_3.

Hammer L., Selective conscientious objection and international human rights, “Israel Law Review” 2002, vol. 36(3), DOI: http://doi.org/10.1017/S0021223700018008.

Izdebski H., Rola i miejsce Karty Praw Podstawowych w Unii Europejskiej w europejskiej filozofii praw człowieka, [in:] 5 lat Karty Praw Podstawowych UE, ed. A. Gubrynowicz, Warszawa 2006.

Kelly T., The legalization of human rights and the protection of torture survivors: Asylum, evidence and disbelief, [in:] Are Human Rights for Migrants? Critical Reflections on the Status of Irregular Migrants in Europe and the United Stated, eds. M.-B. Dembour, T. Kelly, London–New York 2012.

Koser K., International Migration: A Very Short Introduction, New York 2016, DOI: https://10.1093/actrade/9780198753773.001.0001.

Kosińska A.M., Cultural Rights of Third-Country Nationals in EU Law, Cham 2019, DOI: http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30154-5.

Kuźniar R., Deklaracja Wiedeńska i Program Działania, przyjęta przez Światową Konferencję Praw Człowieka, Wiedeń 1993, [in:] Prawa człowieka. Prawo, instytucje, stosunki międzynarodowe, ed. R. Kuźniar, Warszawa 2008.

Lauterpacht S.E., Bethlehem D., The scope and content of the principle of non-refoulement. Opinion, [in:] Refugee Protection in International Law, UNHCR’s Global Consultations on International Protection, eds. E. Feller, V. Turk, F. Nicholson, New York 2005, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511493973.008.

Lippman M., The recognition of conscientious objection to military service as an international human right, “California Western International Journal” 1990, vol. 21(1).

Lynd S., Someday they’ll have a war and nobody will come, “Peace and Change” 2011, vol. 36(2), DOI: https://10.1111/j.1468-0130.2010.00687.x.

Major M.-F., Conscientious objection and international law: A human right?, “Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law” 1992, vol. 24.

Major M.-F., Conscientious objection to military service: The European Commission on Human Rights and the Human Rights Committee, “California Western International Law Journal” 2001, vol. 32(1).

Marcus E.N., Conscientious objection as an emerging human right, “Virginia Journal of International Law” 1998, vol. 38.

Mole N., Asylum and the European Convention on Human Rights: Human Rights Files No. 9 (revised), London 2003.

Morawska E., Konstrukcja normatywna praw podstawowych Unii Europejskiej w Karcie praw podstawowych Unii Europejskiej, [in:] Prawa podstawowe w prawie i praktyce Unii Europejskiej, eds. C. Mik, K. Gałka, Toruń 2009.

Musalo K., Conscientious objection as a basis for refugee status protection for the fundamental right of freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, “Refugee Survey Quarterly” 2007, vol. 26(2).

Sadowski P., A Safe Harbour or a Sinking Ship? On the Protection of Fundamental Rights of Asylum Seekers in Recent CJEU Judgments, “European Journal of Legal Studies” 2019, vol. 11(2).

Schroeder J.B., The Role of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the emergent right of conscientious objection to military service in international law, “Kirchliche Zeitgeschichte” 2011, vol. 24(1), DOI: https://doi.org/10.13109/kize.2011.24.1.169.

Schuster L., Engendering Insecurity: The EU Asylum Regime, [in:] Security, Insecurity and Migration in Europe, ed. G. Lazaridis, London–New York 2016.

Sousa e Brito J. de, Political minorities and the right to tolerance: The development of a right to conscientious objection in constitutional law, “BYU Law Review” 1999, vol. 2(6).

Takemura H., International Human Right to Conscientious Objection to Military Service and Individual Duties to Disobey Manifestly Illegal Orders, Berlin–Heidelberg 2009.

United Nations, Conscientious Objection to Military Service, New York–Geneva 2012.

Yiannaros A., Refusing to kill: Selective conscientious objection and professional military duties, “Journal of Military Ethics” 2018, vol. 17(2–3).

ONLINE SOURCES

Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights, Guide on Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Freedom of thought, conscience and religion (2020), updated on 31 August 2020, https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_Art_9_ENG.pdf (access: 16.2.2021).

European Commission, Humanitarian protection, https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/networks/european_migration_network/glossary_search/humanitarian-protection_en (access: 17.2.2021).

European Union Agency for Asylum, COI Publications, https://easo.europa.eu/information-analysis/country-origin-information/country-reports (access: 16.2.2021).

European Union Agency for Asylum, Situation of Asylum in the European Union: 2019 overview, https://easo.europa.eu/asylum-trends-easo-asylum-report-2020 (access: 17.2.2021).

United Nations Human Rights Council, Rampant human rights violations and war crimes as war-torn Idlib faces the pandemic UN Syria Commission of Inquiry report, 7 July 2020, https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/NewsDetail.aspx?NewsID=26044&LangID=E (access: 16.02.2021).

United Nations Human Rights Council, UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria: No clean hands – behind the frontlines and the headlines, armed actors continue to subject civilians to horrific and increasingly targeted abuse, 15 September 2020, https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/NewsDetail.aspx?NewsID=26237&LangID=E (access: 16.02.2021).

OTHER SOURCES

Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 22: The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion (Article 18): 30/07/93, CCPR/C/21/Rev.l/Add.4.

Opinion of Advocate General Eleanor Sharpston delivered on 31 May 2016, C-573/14 Commissaire général aux réfugiés et aux apatrides v. Mostafa Lounani, ECLI:EU:C:2016:380.

Opinion of Advocate General Eleanor Sharpson delivered on 28 May 2020, Case C‑238/19 EZ v. Bundesrepublik Deutschland, represented by the Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge (Federal Office for Migration and Refugees), ECLI:EU:C:2020:404.

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection and for the content of the protection granted and amending Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents, Brussels, 13.7.2016, COM(2016) 466 final.

United Nations, Conscientious Objection to Military Service. Report prepared in pursuance of resolutions 14 (XXXIV) and 1982/30 of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities by Mr. Asbjern Eide and Mr. Chama Mubanga-Chipoya, members of the Sub-Commission, E/CN.4/Sub.2/1983/30/Rev.1.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Note on Burden and Standard of Proof in Refugee Claims, 16 December 1998.

United Nations Human Rights Council, Guidelines on International Protection No. 10: Claims to Refugee Status Related to Military Service within the context of Article 1A (2) of the 1951 Convention and/or the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees, 12 November 2014, HCR/GIP/13/10/Corr. 1.

United Nations Human Rights Council, Human rights situations that require the Council’s attention, Report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic, Human Rights Council, Thirty-fourth session, 27 February – 24 March 2017, A/HRC/34/64, 2 February 2017.

LEGAL ACTS

Asylum Act in the version promulgated on 2 September 2008 (Federal Law Gazette I, p. 1798).

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (OJ C 202/391, 7.6.2016).

Charter of the United Nations, signed on 26 June 1945, in San Francisco, 1 UNTS XVI.

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as amended by Protocols No. 13, 5 and 8 and supplemented by Protocol No. 2, Rome, 4.11.1950, ETS No. 5.

Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 1951 (UNTS, vol. 189, p. 137) and its additional Protocol of 1967 (UNTS, vol. 606, p. 267).

Council Directive 2001/55/EC of 20 July 2001 on minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of displaced persons and on measures promoting a balance of efforts between Member States in receiving such persons and bearing the consequences thereof (OJ L 212/12, 7.8.2001).

Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted (recast) (OJ L 337, 20.12.2011).

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966, entry into force 23 March 1976, in accordance with Article 49.

Regional Treaties, Agreements, Declarations and Related, Convención Iberoamericana de Derechos de los Jóvenes, October 2005, https://www.refworld.org/docid/4b28ef622.html (access: 10.2.2021).

Treaty on European Union, consolidated version (OJ C 202, 7.6.2016, pp. 13–46).

CASE LAW

Decision of the European Commission of Human Rights of 2 April 1973 in GZ v. Austria, Application no. 5591/72.

Decision of the European Commission of Human Rights of 11 October 1984 in N v. Sweden, Application no. 10410/83.

Judgment of the CJEU of 9 November 2010 in Bundesrepublik Deutschland v. B and D (C 57/09 and C 101/09), ECLI:EU:C:2010:661.

Judgment of the CJEU of 5 September 2012 in Bundesrepublik Deutschland v. Y and Z (C-71/11), ECLI:EU:C:2012:518.

Judgment of the CJEU of 7 November 2013 in Minister voor Immigratie e Asiel v. X and Y and Z v Minister voor Immigratie en Asiel (C 199/12 to C 201/12), ECLI:EU:C:2013:720.

Judgment of the CJEU of 2 December 2014 in A and Others v. Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie (C-148/13 to 150/13), ECLI:EU:C:2014:2406.

Judgment of the CJEU of 26 February 2015 in Andre Lawrence Shepherd v. Bundesrepublik Deutschland (C-472/13), ECLI:EU:C:2015:117.

Judgment of the CJEU of 24 June 2015 in H.T. v. Land Baden-Württemberg (C-373/13), ECLI:EU:C:2015:413.

Judgment of the CJEU of 7 March 2017 in X and X v. État belge (C-638/16 PPU), ECLI:EU:C:2017:173.

Judgment of the CJEU of 19 November 2020 in EZ v. Bundesrepublik Deutschland (C-238/19), ECLI:EU:C:2020:945.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 24 January 2006 in Ülke v. Turkey, Application no. 39437/98.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 7 July 2011 in Bayatyan v. Armenia, Application no. 23459/03.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 12 June 2012 in Savda v. Turkey, Application no. 42730/05.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 7 June 2016 in Enver Aydemir v. Turkey, Application no. 26012/11.

Judgment of the ECtHR of 10 December 2017 in Adyan and Others v. Armenia, Application no. 75604/11.

Opinion 2/13 of the Court (Full Court) of 18 December 2014, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2454.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/sil.2022.31.1.239-261
Data publikacji: 2022-03-29 11:56:33
Data złożenia artykułu: 2021-09-23 11:43:20


Statistics


Total abstract view - 758
Downloads (from 2020-06-17) - PDF - 0

Indicators



Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2022 Anna Magdalena Kosińska

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.