In 2016, the European Commission, as part of a long-term strategy, prospected the creation of an EU Agency for the centralised examination of international protection applications made on the territory of Member States. At the same time, it presented a reform proposal aiming to strengthen the mandate of the Asylum Support Office (EASO), transforming it into the EU Asylum Agency (EUAA). Unlike FRONTEX, the EUAA has received relatively little attention from Academic Doctrine. Given that neither the Treaties nor other typical acts of secondary legislation (such as the Agency's founding Regulation or the Asylum Procedures Directive) fully reflect the gradual emergence of an increasingly integrated administration, and given that the EUAA’s elevated role cannot be fully grasped by merely reading its Statute, the first two chapters of the Thesis are devoted to a detailed analysis of the expansion over time of the structure and functions performed by the EASO first, and the EUAA later. While the EUAA’s competences pertaining to the internal dimension of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) are gradually being strengthened, a similar perspective is discernible in relation to the external dimension of the CEAS, as illustrated in Chapter III. After an in-depth review of the Agency's mandate - considering both the previous and current founding Regulation as well as other documents and acts of soft law – a map of the EUAA's operations in third countries is presented. This constitutes a useful premise for investigating whether the Agency’s operations are aimed at consolidating cooperation with Third Country administrations in line with EU standards and as part of the EU enlargement policy or, rather, represent a further source of externalisation of the right to asylum (or, indeed, whether it is not possible to define where the former ends and the latter begins). In this context, the Agency's activities may directly or indirectly violate the rights of asylum seekers who have applied for international protection in Member States. Chapter IV attempts to illustrate the current complexity and limited nature of mitigations available to verify such violations. An examination of the status quo, alongside the possible evolutions of existing institutions, and currently available (counter)measures, is undertaken. This leads to a proposed solution that - rather than merely innovating the existing paradigm - envisages the creation of a new Board within the Office of the EUAA Fundamental Rights Officer, which takes its cue from the Complaints Mechanism established within the European Investment Bank (EIB). After the present Thesis was completed, on 22 May 2024, a Directive and nine Regulations were published in the EU Official Journal with the aim of reforming the common rules on asylum. Among them, the so-called Reception Directive will have to be transposed by Member States within two years of its formal decree, and the Regulations (with the exception of the Regulation establishing an EU framework for resettlement) will not be directly applicable as their effectiveness will be subject to the lapse of two years from the date of publication in the Official Journal. In the concluding chapter, therefore, the impact of these Regulations is accounted for, in relation to the Agency's mandate and its new set-up. The Agency’s role will become particularly prominent in border screening and asylum procedures, information on Safe Third Countries and Safe Countries of origin, and humanitarian admission operations.
Nel 2016 la Commissione europea, in una prospettiva a lungo termine, immaginava la creazione di un’Agenzia dell’UE per l’esame centralizzato delle domande di protezione internazionale inoltrate sul territorio dell'UE. Contestualmente, presentava una proposta di riforma volta a rafforzare il mandato dell’allora Ufficio di sostegno per l’asilo (EASO) trasformandolo in Agenzia dell’UE per l’asilo (EUAA). Quest’ultima, diversamente da quanto accaduto per FRONTEX, è stata solo parzialmente attenzionata dalla dottrina. Posto che né i Trattati né, tanto meno, altri atti tipici di diritto derivato (quali il Regolamento istitutivo dell’Agenzia o la Direttiva procedure) riflettono del tutto la graduale emersione di uno spazio amministrativo sempre più integrato, e che l’accresciuto ruolo dell’EUAA non si afferra appieno limitandosi alla lettura del suo statuto, i primi due capitoli dello scritto sono dedicati ad un’analisi dettagliata dell’espansione nel tempo della struttura e delle funzioni svolte da EASO prima, e dall’EUAA poi. Mentre le competenze dell’EUAA attinenti alla dimensione interna del SECA vanno via via rafforzandosi, sembrerebbe potersi scorgere – come illustrato nel Capitolo III – una simile traiettoria in relazione alla dimensione esterna dello stesso. Dopo una ricognizione dell’approfondimento del mandato dell’Agenzia, tenuto conto sia di quanto racchiuso nel testo del precedente e attuale regolamento istitutivo che in altri documenti e atti di soft law, si propone una mappatura delle operazioni dell’EUAA nei Paesi Terzi. Questa costituisce premessa utile per indagare se l’operato dell’organismo in esame è volto a consolidare la cooperazione con le amministrazioni degli Stati terzi in linea con gli standard UE e nel contesto del processo di adesione o, piuttosto, rappresenti un’ulteriore fonte di esternalizzazione del diritto di asilo (o, ancora, se non sia possibile definire dove finisce una e inizia l’altra). In questo quadro, rimangono aperte questioni attinenti alla tutela (giurisdizionale e non) delle persone toccate dall’operato dell’Agenzia che, difficilmente, sarà chiamata a rispondere di violazione di diritti fondamentali a cui potrebbe aver contribuito. Il Capitolo IV è volto ad illustrare al lettore l’attuale complessità e limitatezza dei rimedi volti ad accertare tali violazioni. Dopo aver passato in disamina lo status quo e le possibili evoluzioni d’istituti e rimedi ad oggi esistenti - e preso atto degli ostacoli che, pur se si riformassero moderatamente tali sistemi, si incontrerebbero in termini di accertamento della responsabilità in capo all’Agenzia - si delinea una soluzione che, anziché limitarsi ad innovare l’esistente, immagina la creazione di un nuovo Board in seno all’Ufficio del Responsabile dei diritti fondamentali dell’EUAA, che prende le mosse dal Meccanismo per il trattamento dei reclami istituito in seno alla Banca europea per gli investimenti (BEI). A lavoro concluso, il 22 maggio 2024, sono sati pubblicati in Gazzetta una Direttiva e nove Regolamenti, frutto di un lungo negoziato e volti a riformare le regole comuni sull’asilo. Tra questi, la c.d. Direttiva accoglienza dovrà essere trasposta dagli Stati membri nel termine di due anni dall’entrata in vigore e anche i regolamenti - ad eccezione di quello che istituisce un quadro dell’UE per il reinsediamento - in deroga alla regola generale, non saranno direttamente applicabili essendo la loro efficacia subordinata al decorrere di due anni dalla data di pubblicazione. Nel capitolo conclusivo si è quindi voluto dar conto di come tali atti impatteranno il mandato dell’Agenzia e del preminente ruolo che la stessa ricoprirà nel nuovo assetto, specialmente con riferimento alle procedure di accertamento e di asilo in frontiera, alle informazioni sui Paesi Terzi e Paesi di origine e Terzi sicuri e alle operazioni di ammissione umanitaria.
L'AGENZIA DELL'UNIONE EUROPEA PER L'ASILO
COMETTI, MARCELLA
2024
Abstract
In 2016, the European Commission, as part of a long-term strategy, prospected the creation of an EU Agency for the centralised examination of international protection applications made on the territory of Member States. At the same time, it presented a reform proposal aiming to strengthen the mandate of the Asylum Support Office (EASO), transforming it into the EU Asylum Agency (EUAA). Unlike FRONTEX, the EUAA has received relatively little attention from Academic Doctrine. Given that neither the Treaties nor other typical acts of secondary legislation (such as the Agency's founding Regulation or the Asylum Procedures Directive) fully reflect the gradual emergence of an increasingly integrated administration, and given that the EUAA’s elevated role cannot be fully grasped by merely reading its Statute, the first two chapters of the Thesis are devoted to a detailed analysis of the expansion over time of the structure and functions performed by the EASO first, and the EUAA later. While the EUAA’s competences pertaining to the internal dimension of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) are gradually being strengthened, a similar perspective is discernible in relation to the external dimension of the CEAS, as illustrated in Chapter III. After an in-depth review of the Agency's mandate - considering both the previous and current founding Regulation as well as other documents and acts of soft law – a map of the EUAA's operations in third countries is presented. This constitutes a useful premise for investigating whether the Agency’s operations are aimed at consolidating cooperation with Third Country administrations in line with EU standards and as part of the EU enlargement policy or, rather, represent a further source of externalisation of the right to asylum (or, indeed, whether it is not possible to define where the former ends and the latter begins). In this context, the Agency's activities may directly or indirectly violate the rights of asylum seekers who have applied for international protection in Member States. Chapter IV attempts to illustrate the current complexity and limited nature of mitigations available to verify such violations. An examination of the status quo, alongside the possible evolutions of existing institutions, and currently available (counter)measures, is undertaken. This leads to a proposed solution that - rather than merely innovating the existing paradigm - envisages the creation of a new Board within the Office of the EUAA Fundamental Rights Officer, which takes its cue from the Complaints Mechanism established within the European Investment Bank (EIB). After the present Thesis was completed, on 22 May 2024, a Directive and nine Regulations were published in the EU Official Journal with the aim of reforming the common rules on asylum. Among them, the so-called Reception Directive will have to be transposed by Member States within two years of its formal decree, and the Regulations (with the exception of the Regulation establishing an EU framework for resettlement) will not be directly applicable as their effectiveness will be subject to the lapse of two years from the date of publication in the Official Journal. In the concluding chapter, therefore, the impact of these Regulations is accounted for, in relation to the Agency's mandate and its new set-up. The Agency’s role will become particularly prominent in border screening and asylum procedures, information on Safe Third Countries and Safe Countries of origin, and humanitarian admission operations.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
COMETTI_L'AGENZIA DELL'UE PER L'ASILO (1).pdf
embargo fino al 20/06/2025
Descrizione: L'AGENZIA DELL'UNIONE EUROPEA PER L'ASILO
Tipologia:
Tesi di dottorato
Dimensione
4.02 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
4.02 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in SFERA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.