CYIL vol. 8 (2017)

HARALD CHRISTIAN SCHEU CYIL 8 ȍ2017Ȏ first stage, the migrant who manifests his rejection of the basic values shall be obliged to attend a mandatory integration course. At a second stage, those who decline participation in such a course shall be fined. In May 2017, the Austrian parliament adopted a similar legislation on integration 27 which also puts stress on the importance of values and identity. According to Section 1 of the new Austrian Integration Law, 28 migrants shall respect the identity-forming character of the Republic of Austria and its liberal democratic order. Section 6 of the Austrian Integration Law states that persons entitled to asylum or subsidiary protection have to sign a so-called integration contract which obliges them to comply with the fundamental values of the legal and social order and to participate in language and value courses. Those who refuse to participate in integration courses and to respect the basic values of the legal and social order shall be penalized by the reduction or withdrawal of social benefits. Most media coverage has been generated by a provision in the Austrian Integration Law which prohibits the wearing of the burqa and other forms of face veil in public. 29 Another aspect of migrant integration has been tackled by the new Austrian Law on Islam 30 which was adopted in 2015. The new law bars foreign funding for mosques and imams in Austria. It is not the purpose of this contribution to examine the legitimacy of integration laws adopted by Austria and Bavaria. But it is sufficient to say that those pieces of legislation deal with specific aspects of integration that do not fall within the competences of the EU. It can hardly be expected that language requirements in Member States, value courses and sanctions for non-compliance with values shall be clarified by common EU strategies or action plans. A common EU measure banning the use of burqas and face veils appears as an almost absurd idea. Measures related to constitutional values rather fall in the ambit of Article 4, paragraph 2 TEU according to which the Union shall respect the national identities of Member States which are inherent in their fundamental structures. Last but not least, Article 4 TEU recalls that national security remains the sole responsibility of Member States. Conclusions We may conclude that in the light of EU law the issue of migrant integration is hard to comprehend. Given the absence of a clear legal concept of integration, the specific delimitation of EU powers in this field is very difficult. Article 79 paragraph 4 TFEU which is the only explicit provision on migrant integration in the founding Treaties does not provide a clear solution to this problem. Although migrant integration is in fact closely linked to the EU’s area of freedom, security and justice, several aspects of integration have to be dealt with in other fields of EU competences. At the same time, some crucial questions remain within the ambit of the Member States. Nevertheless, EU bodies obviously understand migrant integration as an important agenda for the EU. Recent Commission documents and the policy of financing integration 27 In June 2017 the Austrian Integration Law has been signed by the President. 28 The text of the new law and various documents of the legislation process are available at https://www.parlament. gv.at/PAKT/VHG/XXV/ME/ME_00290/index.shtml. 29 See Article 2 of the new Austrian Integration Law. In the event of a breach of the burqa ban a fine of 150€ shall be imposed. 30 Federal Law on the External Legal Relationships of Islamic Religious Societies (BGBl. I Nr. 39/2015). 5.

180