An analysis of the European Commissions proposal to recast the Dublin 2. Regulation : does it sufficiently reflect member states international obligations to protect asylum-seekers fundamental rights?

Abstract

The Dublin II Regulation has been described as „a cornerstone‟ of the Common European Asylum System, a system which is intended to be fully committed to the obligations of the Refugee Convention and other relevant human rights instruments and in particular the right to asylum and principle of non-refoulement. As a responsibility-sharing mechanism, the Dublin II Regulation works on the assumption that Member States comply with their international obligations with respect to the treatment of asylum-seekers. However, the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in MSS v Belgium and Greece confirmed that certain Member States are falling short of their obligations to protect asylum-seekers‟ fundamental rights. This paper will discuss the deficiencies in the current Dublin II Regulation and the merits of the Commission‟s proposal to recast the Regulation. The paper considers whether the Commission‟s proposal to recast the Dublin II Regulation sufficiently reflects Member States‟ internationalobligations in relation to the fundamental rights of asylum-seekers, and in light of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.