Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-23-Speech-2-093"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030923.4.2-093"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The Republic of Austria’s initiative, motivated by a need to respond to ‘a dramatic increase in asylum applicants’ in that country, ‘contrary to the European trend’, fits into the logic of building ‘Fortress Europe’.
The initiative aimed to produce a list of third countries which qualify as safe for the purpose of taking the responsibility for examining an application for asylum, on the assumption that the country responsible for studying an application was the country where the applicant entered the Union. Of the countries on the proposed list, Switzerland is the only non-EU Member State and non-Schengen country. It can therefore be deduced that Austria’s immediate targets were the EU candidate countries with which it shares a border.
As the rapporteur points out, however, there is a fundamental principle at stake here, namely that the Geneva Convention allows any applicant for asylum to have his or her case individually examined. Even if a list of ‘safe third states’ could be established, therefore, an application for asylum could not be automatically rejected because of the provisions of the Geneva Convention.
Besides, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, a regulation would not be the right instrument to use in relation to such a vital aspect of the sovereignty of the Member States."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples