TY - UNPB

T1 - Mapping of CEAS Transposition in EU Member States using AID

AU - Consterdine, Erica

PY - 2019/8/1

Y1 - 2019/8/1

N2 - This paper maps out the current state of transposition of the CEAS instruments in each Member State (MS). Drawing on ECRE’s Asylum Information Database (AIDA here-on-in), the paper goes on to provide a simple quantitative measure of transposition to highlight areas of convergence and harmonisation as well as divergence indicating areas for improving harmonised in the transposition of CEAS. A total of six indicators (of 19 indicators) can be taken as baseline measures of transposition of CEAS. Overall, the transposition of requirements where explicitly set out as measured by our quantifiable indicators demonstrates that the selected MSs (who opt in) have successfully adopted such requirements. However, whilst transposition of CEAS into national legislation may have been achieved, the practices of these procedures often involve significant obstacles, barriers and caveats which may not be in practice achieve the various goals of CEAS stature. Moreover, in terms of harmonisation of CEAS more generally, our indicators suggest that there is wide variation and discrepancy on asylum procedures, reception conditions and Dublin appeals. As many commentators, researchers and academics have stressed, overall Member States seem to use harmonisation as an argument or legitimation to change higher national standards to lower EU wide standards.

AB - This paper maps out the current state of transposition of the CEAS instruments in each Member State (MS). Drawing on ECRE’s Asylum Information Database (AIDA here-on-in), the paper goes on to provide a simple quantitative measure of transposition to highlight areas of convergence and harmonisation as well as divergence indicating areas for improving harmonised in the transposition of CEAS. A total of six indicators (of 19 indicators) can be taken as baseline measures of transposition of CEAS. Overall, the transposition of requirements where explicitly set out as measured by our quantifiable indicators demonstrates that the selected MSs (who opt in) have successfully adopted such requirements. However, whilst transposition of CEAS into national legislation may have been achieved, the practices of these procedures often involve significant obstacles, barriers and caveats which may not be in practice achieve the various goals of CEAS stature. Moreover, in terms of harmonisation of CEAS more generally, our indicators suggest that there is wide variation and discrepancy on asylum procedures, reception conditions and Dublin appeals. As many commentators, researchers and academics have stressed, overall Member States seem to use harmonisation as an argument or legitimation to change higher national standards to lower EU wide standards.

M3 - Working paper

BT - Mapping of CEAS Transposition in EU Member States using AID

PB - CEASEVAL Research on the Common European Asylum System

ER -