European Court of Justice sets new obstacles for deportation
The latest judgment by the European Court of Justice (file number C-517/17 ), which was published on July 16, received little media attention. This decision calls into question the European asylum system.
Published: August 12, 2020, 9:30 am
The highest EU court, whose jurisprudence is binding for all member states, has granted stay to an asylum seeker from Eritrea who had applied for asylum in Germany, although he had already been recognized as a refugee in Italy.
The responsible Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) in Germany therefore wanted to transfer the man to the Italian authorities as part of a retrial. According to the provisions of the relevant Dublin Regulation, responsibility for asylum-seeking third-country nationals usually lies with the member state in which the person first entered the so-called Schengen area.
The accompanying procedural guideline 2013/32 therefore provides that an application for international protection in Germany, for example, can be regarded as inadmissible if this protection has already been granted by another EU country, in this case Italy. The ECJ has now significantly increased the hurdles for returning migrants in such cases.
The Luxembourg judges emphasized that the rejection of an asylum application is only permissible if the person concerned has had the opportunity to be heard personally beforehand. At this hearing – and that is the real crux of the matter – the applicant can comment on whether another member state has actually granted him international protection.
He is then able to present all the specific circumstances of his case so that the asylum authority can decide on the basis of this information whether the applicant is in “serious danger” if he is transferred to the EU country of first entry and subject to “inhuman or degrading treatment” according to the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Should this be the case, the return of the person concerned as provided for in the Dublin Regulation would be inadmissible. The “refugee” is then likely to stay in the member state to which he illegally moved to.
In the future, the BAMF will have to carefully check each individual case since the authority will have to prove in court that the relevant provisions of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights were adhered to – a long and arduous task. Moreover, whether this requirement is being met in practice is likely to lead to lengthy and controversial discussions. Inadequate accommodation options or hostility from the local population in a member state could be sufficient to make the deportation of a foreigner impossible.
It is therefore foreseeable that the already comparatively small number of transfers from Germany to other EU countries will continue to decline as a result of this new ruling. In addition, many more “protection seekers” who have already been registered in Italy or other poor Schengen countries, will now make their way to rich EU countries.
The Luxembourg judge’s verdict is also likely to sow a lot of discord in the EU since it does not value the so-called “European spirit”. The question arises as to how the ECJ made the assumption that the Charter of Fundamental Rights is not being respected by some individual countries. The observance of the fundamental and human rights as well as compliance with the European regulations on migration and asylum, have always been essential prerequisites for open borders in the Schengen zone.
The decision of the European Court of Justice has yet another unintended consequence: If “refugees’ are not allowed to be sent back to other member states because they are threatened with inhuman or degrading treatment there, then the meaningfulness of the quota regulation wanted by Brussels and Berlin for the distribution of asylum seekers within the EU as the core of a new European asylum policy, would no longer be valid.
Migrants who have been assigned to an “unattractive” host country, will obviously try to move to their “desired state” because this expectation is strengthened by the new ECJ ruling.
All rights reserved. You have permission to quote freely from the articles provided that the source (www.freewestmedia.com) is given. Photos may not be used without our consent.
Consider donating to support our work
Help us to produce more articles like this. FreeWestMedia is depending on donations from our readers to keep going. With your help, we expose the mainstream fake news agenda.
Keep your language polite. Readers from many different countries visit and contribute to Free West Media and we must therefore obey the rules in, for example, Germany. Illegal content will be deleted.
If you have been approved to post comments without preview from FWM, you are responsible for violations of any law. This means that FWM may be forced to cooperate with authorities in a possible crime investigation.
If your comments are subject to preview by FWM, please be patient. We continually review comments but depending on the time of day it can take up to several hours before your comment is reviewed.
We reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, contain slander or foul language, or are irrelevant to the discussion.

NOAA Predicts Zero Sunspots for Almost the Whole 2030s
CLIMATEThe United States' government scientific organization, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), predicts zero sunspots from 2031 to 2040. This is an extreme situation that has not occurred in as long as humanity has been counting sunspots, and it leads us into uncharted territory in terms of our solar system. However, this prediction aligns with the warnings of the world-renowned solar researcher Valentina Zharkova for many years, who indicated in 2019 various signs of this catastrophic phenomenon, including the extreme hailstorms we have seen in Europe and the world this summer. The forecast and various observations this year give cause for very significant concern. In this unique analysis, Free West Media explains why.

European Nationalist Parties Forge Cooperation Ahead of EU Elections
EUROPEAN ELECTIONSOn Saturday, August 26, representatives of six European nationalist parties gathered in Budapest. The meeting was initiated by the Hungarian party Mi Hazánk and took place in the national parliament. Representatives of the parties signed a joint declaration that not only reaffirms the parties' friendship but also their unity on a range of complex political issues. A surprisingly clear and radical manifesto was established. The hope is that this cooperation will lead to success in the EU elections and eventually result in the formation of a group in the European Parliament. For Swedish nationalism, this meeting marks a success as Sweden, for the first time, has a party represented in a leading nationalist cooperation in Europe. Free West Media was present at this historic event.

Turkey Believes Sweden Hasn’t Done Enough
Sweden will have to wait a bit longer for NATO membership, according to Turkey's Justice Minister Jilmaz Tunc. First, Sweden must extradite the "terrorists" Turkey wants and stop the desecration of the Quran.

Swedish Weapon Takes Down Russia’s Best Attack Helicopter
The Russian attack helicopter Ka-52 is considered one of the world's best and has struck fear in Ukraine, where it has hunted down tanks and other armored vehicles, often beyond the range of many light anti-aircraft systems. However, it has met its match in the Swedish air defense missile system RBS 70, which has quickly led to significant losses for the Russian helicopter forces.

Strong Confidence in German AfD
Alternative for Germany (AfD) held a party conference on July 29-30 to select candidates for the upcoming EU election next year. EU Parliament member Maximilian Krah, belonging to the party's more radical, ethnonationalist faction, was appointed as the top candidate. The party's two spokespersons delivered powerful speeches criticizing the EU's failed migration policy and trade sanctions that isolate Europe and Germany from the rest of the world. They argued that it's time for the EU to return a significant portion of its power to national parliaments. However, they have dropped the demand for Germany to exit the EU.

The Establishment Wants to Ban Germany’s Second Largest Party – for the Sake of Democracy
The rising popularity of AfD has raised strong concerns within the establishment. Despite lies and demonization in the media and isolation from the overall political establishment, the party continues to grow. Certain representatives of the party are accused of becoming increasingly "extreme," and in an unusual move, the influential weekly newspaper Der Spiegel demanded that AfD be "banned."

Dutch FvD break through the media blockade
What is happening in the Netherlands? It is often difficult to follow events in other countries, especially when distorted by system media. We give Forum for Democracy (FvD) the opportunity to speak out on the political situation in the Netherlands and the staunch resistance they face in trying to save the country.

The Ursula von der Leyen Affair
After a criminal complaint in Belgium against the President of the European Commission, the so-called SMS-case, now takes a new turn. The judge responsible for the investigation will likely gain access to the secret messages exchanged between Ursula von der Leyen and Albert Bourla, CEO of Pfizer, at least if they haven't been deleted.

Publisher of Unique Literature Worldwide Blocked by International Distributor
Arktos has distinguished itself by publishing groundbreaking philosophers and social critics. Now, the publisher's international distributor has abruptly terminated the cooperation, and more than 400 already printed titles cannot reach their audience. There is strong evidence that the distributor has been under pressure, something that has also happened in Sweden. We have spoken with Arktos founder Daniel Friberg about the ongoing struggle for freedom of speech in a shrinking cultural corridor.

Care prompts bishops to criticize transgender ideology
The Catholic bishops of the Scandinavian countries presented an open five-page letter criticizing transgender ideology on March 21, just before Easter. The document primarily expresses care and advice and was read aloud in Catholic churches in Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, and Iceland. Cardinal Anders Arborelius, Bishop of Stockholm, is one of the signatories of the document.