The Pravni okvir EU o neregularnoj migraciji – kritika i uloga Republike Srbije
Sažetak
Zajednički evropski sistem azila (CEAS) predstavlja ključnu komponentu u upravljanju rastućim izazovima koje izazivaju neregularni migranti u Evropskoj uniji. Ovaj sveobuhvatni pregled istražuje osnovne ciljeve i prednosti CEAS-a, ističući njegovu ključnu ulogu u harmonizaciji postupaka za azil, zaštiti ljudskih prava i promicanju solidarnosti između članica EU. Proučavaju se postignuća CEAS-a u smanjenju dispariteta i minimiziranju "šopinga za azil" putem harmonizacije, zajedno s naporima da se obrada zahteva za azil postigne veća efikasnost. Bez obzira na svoje prednosti, CEAS se suočava sa brojnim izazovima, kako internim, tako i eksternim. Dispariteti u primeni među državama članicama izazivaju zabrinutost zbog nejednakog tretmana, naglašavajući važnost mehanizama za deljenje tereta, kao što je Dublinska uredba. Rad ukazuje da politički sukobi između država članica EU otežavaju napredak ka jedinstvenijem pristupu upravljanju tražiocima azila. CEAS se takođe suočava sa zastojima i kašnjenjima u obradi zahteva, što može negativno uticati na mentalno i fizičko blagostanje podnosilaca zahteva. Spoljni faktori, kao što su porast antiimigrantskih sentimenta i populističkih pokreta u određenim državama članicama, takođe utiču na razvoj i primenu jedinstvene azilne politike. Posebna se pažnja posvećuje Nacrtu novog pakta o migracijama i azilu Evropske komisije iz 2020. godine, koji ima za cilj da adresira ove nedostatke kroz naglašavanje unapređenih mehanizama solidarnosti, brže obrade zahteva i poboljšane saradnje sa trećim zemljama. Republika Srbija, kao ključna tranzitna zemlja duž migrantskog puta na Zapadnom Balkanu, suočavala se sa značajnim izazovima u upravljanju neregularnim migrantskim tokovima. Izbeglice, uglavnom u potrazi za azilom u zapadnoevropskim i severnoevropskim zemljama, prolaze su kroz Srbiju, iako je to privremena stanica, a ne stalna destinacija. Nakon nezapamćenog priliva migranata tokom 2015. i početkom 2016. godine, Srbija je usvojila proaktivni pristup, fokusirajući se na zaštitu ljudskih prava i humanitarnu pomoć. Ovaj pristup pokazao se uspešnim i istakao kapacitet Srbije za upravljanje migrantskim krizama. Institucionalni okvir Srbije za upravljanje migracijama usklađen je sa politikama proširenja EU, a država se pozicionirala kao "prihvatljiva za izbeglice" u pripremi za pristupanje EU. Kako bi obezbedila buduću spremnost za slične situacije, Srbija mora da investira u institucionalno pamćenje, zabeležavajući iskustva i rešenja za lakšu buduću primenu. Obrazovanje treba da bude trostruki pristup, pružajući institucijama, građanima i migrantima relevantno znanje i veštine. Ova proaktivna strategija pomoći će Srbiji da efikasno upravlja neregularnim migracijama u budućnosti i promoviše prava, bezbednost i integraciju migranata..
Reference
Amnesty International. (2024, April 10). EU: Vote to adopt the Migration and Asylum Pact ‘a missed opportunity’. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/04/eu-vote-migra-tion-pact-missed-opportunity/
Beirens, H., Maas, S., Petronella, S., & van der Velden, M. (2016). Study on the temporary protection directive: Final report. European Commission, Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs. https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2020-09/final_re-port_evaluation_tpd_en.pdf
Daher, R. (2020). Crisis on the edge of Europe. Migration and self-defense in Hungary. Limen: Journal of the Hungarian Migration Research Institute, (2), 37–60.
European Commission. (2021, October 19). Serbia 2021 Report: Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Directorate-General for Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations. https://neighbour-hood-enlargement.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-10/Serbia-Report-2021.pdf
Eurostat. (2024). Asylum applications – annual statistics. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/sta-tistics-explained/index.php?title=Asylum_statistics&oldid=558844
Friends of Refugee Solidarity in Solidarity International. (2023, June 15). Press release on the Alassa Mfouapon trial against the state of Baden Württemberg. “Refugees proudly march before the Federal Administrative Court: partial success for refugee rights – legal development of the Federal Administrative Court”. https://freunde-fluechtlingssolidaritaet.org/en/press-release-on-the-trial-alassa-mfouapon-against-the-state-of-baden-wuerttemberg-refugees-bring-proudly-to-the-federal-administrative-court-partial-success-for-refu-gee-rights-legal-development
Human Rights Watch. (2018). EU/Italy/Libya: Disputes over rescues put lives at risk. https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/07/25/eu/italy/libya-disputes-over-rescues-put-lives-risk
InfoMigrants. (2024, April 15). German interior minister reports success of migration policy. https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/56424/german-interior-minister-reports-suc-cess-of-migration-policy
Iratxe García on the Migration and Asylum Pact – “For the first time, we will have real solidarity at the centre of the EU policy on migration and asylum.” (2024, April 11). Euractive. https://pr.euractiv.com/pr/iratxe-garc-migration-and-asylum-pact-first-time-we-will-have-real-solidarity-centre-eu-policy
Koser, K., & Black, R. (1999). Limits to harmonization: The “temporary protection” of refugees in the European Union. International Migration, 37(3), 521–541. https://doi. org/10.1111/1468-2435.00082
Novaković, M. (2011). Protokol 14 za Evropsku konvenciju o ljudskim pravima i osnovnim slobodama. Evropsko zakonodavstvo, 9(33–34), 52–65.
Novaković, M. (2021). EUPAN i CAF kao smernice reforme javne uprave u Srbiji. Evropsko zakonodavstvo, 20(76), 31–42. http://doi.fil.bg.ac.rs/pdf/journals/iipe_ez/2021-76/iipe_ez-2021-20-76-2.pdf
Novaković, M. (2023). A few remarks on the imaginary character of borders and its misuse in Western Balkans. In E. Benedetti, A. Piacquadio, & L. Fabrizi (Eds.), Scritti in onore di Gian Luigi Cecchini: Liber Amicorum (pp. 625–635). Giuffrè.
O’Carroll, L. (2024, April 10). EU passes asylum and migration pact after eight years of deadlock. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/10/eu-passes-asylum-and-migration-pact-after-eight-years-of-deadlock
Ponzo, I. (2023). Looking into policy change: How the Italian asylum regime came of age. In C. Finotelli, & I. Ponzo (Eds.), Migration control logics and strategies in Europe (pp. 283–302). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26002-5_15
Poptcheva, E-M. (2015). EU legal framework on asylum and irregular immigration. European Parliamentary Research Service.
Pro Asyl. (2023, June 16). Keine Kompromisse auf Kosten des Flüchtlingsschutzes. https://www.proasyl.de/geas/
Sanjeewani, N. (2024). Is the EU breaching its own human rights policies in dealing with Ukrainian refugees? The Loop. https://theloop.ecpr.eu/implications-of-the-tempo-rary-protection-directive-in-the-russia-ukraine-war/
Simonovits, B. (2020). The public perception of the migration crisis from the Hungarian point of view: Evidence from the field. In B. Glorius, & J. Doomernik (Eds.), Geographies of asylum in Europe and the role of European localities (pp. 155–176). Springer. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-030-25666-1_8
The European Council on Refugees and Exiles. (2023, June 30). Germany: NGOs oppose government’s position on reforms of CEAS, Rise of far-right attacks on reception facilities, Reform of Immigration Law for third country nationals passed. https://ecre.org/germany-ngos-oppose-governments-position-on-reforms-of-ceas-rise-of-far-right-attacks-on-re-ception-facilities-reform-of-immigration-law-for-third-country-nationals-passed/
Tsourdi, E. (2017). Solidarity at work? The prevalence of emergency-driven solidarity in the administrative governance of the Common European Asylum System. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 24(5), 667–686. https://doi. org/10.1177/1023263X17742801
Vietti, F., & Scribner, T. (2013). Human insecurity: Understanding international migration from a human security perspective. Journal on Migration and Human Security, 1(1), 17–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/233150241300100102
