EU High-Tech Borders and the Right to Effective Remedies
The Migration Working Group and the Digital Public Sphere Working Group invite you to their event on EU high-tech borders and the right to effective remedies.
‘Schengen and the administration of exclusion: legal remedies caught in between entry bans, risk assessment and Artificial Intelligence’, Dr. Evelien Brouwer, Lecturer in Public Law and Technology at Utrecht University
To create an area in which persons can move freely, the Schengen states committed to control their external borders to prevent irregular immigration and the entry of third-country nationals (TCNs) who are considered to be ‘a public order and security risk’. The exclusion of ‘unwanted aliens’ is based on the mutual enforcement of national decisions, such as entry bans reported in the Schengen Information System, or objections against the issuing of a Schengen visa, based on the consultation procedure in the Visa Code. This contribution focuses on the right of TCNs to have access to effective remedies, both with regard to existing and newer mechanisms of exclusion. It argues that when dealing with the use of large-scale databases and risk assessment as basis for excluding admission, existing rules and case-law by the CJEU should be taken into account to ensure access to effective judicial protection for TCNs.
‘Information Sharing in the Administration of Asylum: In-Between Gaps in Judicial Protection and Interstate Trust’, Dr. Niovi Vavoula, Lecturer (Assistant Professor) in Migration and Security at Queen Mary University of London.
In most EU policy areas, procedural cooperation between national administrations takes place through the shared implementation of composite decision-making procedures, facilitated by the operation of multijurisdictional networks or horizontal or vertical information exchange. In the context of asylum policy, such administrative cooperation has been necessary in the distribution of asylum seekers—in accordance with the Dublin III Regulation, which allocates responsibility among Member States to examine an asylum application. In addition to rules in the Regulation itself—Article 34—information sharing also takes place through Eurodac, an EU-wide centralized information system. This presentation examines whether the Dublin system ensures effective judicial and administrative remedies in the operationalization of multijurisdictional information networks. It analyses the relevant Eurodac and Dublin-related legislation, national implementation, and national case law through the lens of administrative cooperation. It is argued that administrative cooperation through information sharing takes precedence over the right to an effective remedy, and that, in practice, judicial and extrajudicial remedies are insufficient to protect asylum seekers.
All attendees are strongly invited to join in the discussion that will follow.
All interested fellows, PhD researchers, professors and visiting academics are invited to participate.