The European Court of Human Rights: A Guardian of Minimum Standards in the Context of Immigration

Abstract

The innovative use of the general doctrines and the nature of the European Convention on Human Rights as a living instrument have enabled the progressive protection of immigrants. This research illustrates how the immigration case law of the European Court of Human Rights has been evolving in the past years. The development of the immigration jurisprudence of the ECtHR has connection to EU law and general concepts of international law, such as the best interest of child. In addition, the recent case law on positive obligations is contributing to discussion over the reception conditions of asylum seekers. The Strasbourg jurisprudence sets a minimum standard for the European immigration policy that should be taken into account even in exceptional circumstances.

Do the Challenges of LGBTQ Asylum Applicants Under Dublin Register With the European Court of Human Rights?

“…That is, if asylum seekers enter another State, they may, upon interception, be returned to the State they first entered after fleeing their country of origin (Menéndez, 2016). Asylum seekers can appeal decisions made by States under Dublin to the Court (applicants are required to exhaust all domestic remedies before appealing to the Court), which is then called upon to interpret Dublin and the accompanying rules, procedures, and conditions outlined in various Directives (Ippolito, 2013) 1 in line with EU human rights law and international refugee law (Viljanen and Heiskanen, 2016). As Dublin makes explicit, States are bound by appropriate case-law of the Court (see Recital 32 of Dublin III Regulation).…”