, Madrid ESTUDIOS J. ROLDÁN BARBERO La aplicación territorial del derecho de la Unión Europea y el derecho internacional C. ARANGÜENA FANEGO Emisión y ejecución en España de órdenes europeas de protección D. ORDÓÑEZ SOLÍS ¿Cómo se derivan entre las administraciones españolas las responsabilidades nancieras por el incumplimiento del derecho de la Unión Europea?

Since the establishment of the Schengen area, border management has been having momentum within the European Union (EU) and, one of its major building blocks is the common policy on visas. This allows to control who can have access to the Schengen area for short stays that do not exceed three months over any six-month period. This article investigates how the EU visa policy has been influenced by the ever-evolving migratory dynamics towards the EU. Focusing on the latest reform of the Common Code on Visa, which has entered into force in 2020, this article argues that the new approach to conditionality in EU migration law has consolidated the intertwining between the EU visa policy and cooperation on readmission. Over the years, the latter has constituted an incentive for the EU in order to offer visa facilitation regimes or specific visa waivers to nationals of third countries. However, this article criticizes the new mechanism, introduced by the recent reform, and providing the European Commission with the mandate to propose specific restrictive measures related to visa processing and visa fee in case of a lack of cooperation especially on readmission. In an attempt to shed light on the legal concerns raised by this mechanism, the paper concludes that it even emphasises the discriminatory effects of the EU visa policy and, more generally, it impacts on the cooperation with third countries within the EU General Approach to Migration and Mobility.

On the 70th anniversary of the UN Refugee Convention, this article examines the concept of solidarity and explains its relevance today, through the lens of the Global Compact on Refugees (GCR). While stressing the potential as well as the challenges for thorough implementation of the solidarity mechanisms established by the GCR, the article argues that regional organizations may contribute to meeting the GCR objectives. This is particularly urgent for regions that are most affected by migratory flows. In proposing new ways of approaching the concept of solidarity, the article suggests that the African Union strengthen mechanisms other than the physical sharing of refugees, including pooling resources to support states experiencing large influxes of refugees. In addition to a system of financial support for refugee protection, the article also recommends that the European Union ensures safe channels for arrivals and a more robust resettlement programme, to help realize the GCR objectives.

relied on to dismiss the persecution risk and refuse protection. Similarly, the Grand Chamber referred to the CJEU case of A, B, C, concerning three applicants who had lodged an application for asylum in the Netherlands because they feared persecution in their respective countries of origin on account, in particular, of their homosexuality. In its conclusion, the Court held, inter alia, that national authorities are precluded from finding that "the statements of the applicant for asylum lack credibility merely because the applicant did not rely on his declared sexual orientation on the first occasion he was given to set out the ground for persecution." 18 Concluding Remarks The Grand Chamber judgment in F.G. v. Sweden can be seen as a valuable contribution to the interpretation of asylum law, both in terms of setting domestic legal standards regarding the risk assessment for asylum applicants, as well as in assessing the risk of the private and public practice of religion. The importance of the decision mainly lies in the Court deciding that national authorities must asses "of their own motion" the risk to the applicant of factors they are aware of that may lead to persecution, regardless of whether or not the applicant chooses to rely on those elements in his or her asylum application. Also of note was the Court's reiteration of the long-standing guidelines of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees that "one should not be compelled to hide, change or renounce one's religious beliefs in order to avoid persecution." 19 The manifold impacts of the judgment are also reflected in the interaction on refugee and asylum rights between the two supranational Courts in Europe, 20 the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union, demonstrating the broader context in which this judgment can be situated. Ultimately, the present decision might be seen as a step closer to achieving an enrichment of the standard of protection in this area of law and consolidating the guarantees for particularly vulnerable groups such as asylum seekers. ENDNOTES