No abstract

No abstract

This piece critically examines migration policies in Greece and Turkey with an emphasis on the Greek experience. It examines four thematic areas which shape the migration debates: social change, citizenship, rights and sovereignty. It then turns to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights to assess the main challenges associated with migrants' rights: free trial, deprivation of liberty and conditions and procedures of detention and extradition. Honing in upon the case of Muslim migrants in Greece, it charts patterns of solidarity and exclusion. Exploring the impact of the Greek crisis on immigration, it highlights the securitization of public discourse on migrants and the rise of xenophobic political factions. The article concludes by suggesting that there are underexplored areas in which Greece and Turkey could cooperate when it comes to immigration and ensuring migrants' rights.

The years after 2015 were remarkable for the reception and accommodation schemes of refugees fleeing Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. The EU‐Turkey common statement of March 2016 and, most of all, the sealing of the Balkan corridor, blocked the flow of refugees towards central Europe through Greece, testing the readiness of the Greek authorities to take action to meet a series of urgent needs (accommodation, nutrition, asylum procedures, health) and social integration processes (education, training, access to labour). Approximately 45,000 refugees are settled in refugee camps or urban settlements all over the country. Those entrapped in the Eastern Aegean islands should be returned to Turkey, which is considered a “safe third country”. The purpose of this article is to shed light on a phenomenon that is ongoing and challenges a series of policies and legal principles both in Greece and the EU.

Why would minorities of Greece bring their case before the European Court of Human Rights? What do the minority groups or individuals belonging to a minority group envisage when they communicate their case to Strasbourg? What are the common patterns of minority mobilisation for rights claims before the Court of Strasbourg? Minority mobilisation and litigation in Strasbourg is related to the formation of the status regarding a minority group, the latter being the product of a complex process of political character, dependent on a continuous, overt or covert struggle for power. Th e axis of this relation is defi ned by claims of the minority and their recognition or non-recognition by the state. In other terms, this struggle can be seen as a balance between demand and enjoyment of rights. Th ese claims of minorities aim at improving, correcting or implementing the legal status. Freedom of expression, religion or association constitute the main grounds for allegations of more than 45 cases brought before the Court of Strasbourg so far. It seems that the Greek law-making and policy-implementing mechanisms are reluctant to accommodate a broader conception about membership to the Greek nation/Greek state mainly due to the continuing ideological constraints. Although religious otherness is slowly being acknowledged and institutionalised, the recognition of national otherness is so far not tolerated.