Common European Asylum System in a Changing World

Similarly to the 1951 Geneva Convention the Charter of Fundamental Rights contains right to asylum (Article 18) as well as principle of non-refoulement (Article 19) that provides protection in the event of removal, expulsion or extradition. Article 47 of the Charter provides the right to an effective remedy in case of violation of any provision of EU law including the Charter itself. Such effective remedy comprises right to judicial protection against a refusal of access to the territory or access to the procedures involved. The Charter of Fundamental Rights constitutes the basic standard for the promotion of mutual trust between Member States, which constitutes a prerequisite for the application of some EU legal acts. 2.2.2 Secondary EU Law: Common European Asylum System (CEAS) • 2013 Dublin III Regulation

The Dublin III Regulation (604/2013) aims to establish a uniform system of rules for determining the Member State responsible for processing an application for international protection. The Dublin III Regulation is directly applied, not only by the Member States of the European Union, including the United Kingdom, Ireland, and Denmark, but also by four non-member states, namely Iceland, Norway, Liechtenstein, and Switzerland. The Regulation regards applications for asylum as well as applications for subsidiary protection. It lays down criteria determining the Member State’s obligation to examine an application for asylum or subsidiary protection.The criteria aim to establish a uniform system of rules that determines which Member State is responsible for examining an asylum application in order to prevent such phenomena as speculative asylum shopping and “refugees in orbit”, i.e. a situation in which applicants for international protection are constantly being transferred from one state to another. The Dublin III Regulation also contains two discretionary provisions which allow a Member State to derogate from the above criteria. The first, called “the sovereignty clause”, provides that any member state may decide to consider an application for international protection lodged by a third-country national or a stateless person, even if it is not competent under the criteria laid down in that regulation. The second discretionary clause, the so- called “humanitarian clause”, stipulates that the Member State conducting the procedure for determining the Member State concerned or the Member State concerned may at any time before the first decision on the merits require another Member State to take over the applicant for humanitarian reasons, in particular for family or cultural reasons, in order to reunite other family members, even if that Member State is not competent. A number of provisions of the Dublin II Regulation (predecessor of Dublin III) and Dublin III Regulation have been the subject of CJEU judgments. The most important

29