Climate change is one of the greatest challenges facing humankind and its effects will hit the most vulnerable persons disproportionately hard. Several millions of people risk displacement due to environmental hazards, natural disasters and climate mediated conflicts, influencing migration patterns across the world. Without a strategy for protecting specifically climate refugees, States risk violating several human rights, which makes the issue highly relevant to the international community. Nevertheless, an intergovernmental strategy for addressing the challenges does not yet exist. This thesis focuses specifically on the European Union’s role in protecting climate refugees. It offers an analysis of the mechanical and attitudinal dimensions of refugee protection in the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) and uses post-colonial theory as a tool for interpreting its implementation. This thesis is written with the purpose of contributing to the discourse on how climate refugees can and should fit in under current EU legislative mechanisms.

Following the political changes induced by the fall of the Communist regimes across Eastern Europe, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and Poland embarked on the road of economic liberalization and democratization. This process was formally concluded with the so-called Visegrád countries' accession to the EU in 2004. However, in relation to the refugee crisis the Visegrád countries emerged within the EU united in their opposition to comply with the so- called mandatory refugee relocation scheme. The position of the Visegrád countries evoked not only significant media attention but also academic inquiry on the securitization of asylum policies in the Visegrád region. This research analyses the Europeanisation of the asylum policies in the Visegrád countries in three periods: 1. the early years of democratic development 2. The harmonization of policies leading up to EU accession and 3. The development of related policies after EU accession. The Europeanisation of asylum policies coincide with the development of the Common European Asylum System and the deepening of EU legislative powers in the field of asylum policy. The author concluded that the field of integration policy where Member States retain significant authority has become a strict control mechanism of limiting displaced person access to...

This thesis deals with the issue of solidarity and burden-sharing (responsibility-sharing respectively) in the EU Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. Its primary aim is to apply the theory of burden-sharing to the case of the EU asylum policy and in particular, to verify or falsify Olson's free-riding hypothesis on the exploitation of the great by the small (meaning of the rich by the poor). This hypothesis will be tested using a mixed research method which combines qualitative and quantitative elements. The qualitative part will focus on the analysis of the so-called Dublin Regulation (Dublin II and III) and its criteria and mechanisms of determining the responsible Member State for examining an asylum application. Applying Moravcsik's liberal intergovernmentalism, a special emphasis will be placed on the proces of negotiating the Regulation (Dublin II) in an attempt to identify and clarify dominant Member States' positions and their influence on the final wording. Consequently, the level of burden- sharing will be illustrated on the example of interstate transfers of asylum seekers (so-called physical burden-sharing). This type of burden-sharing will be also demonstrated qualitatively by means of statistical data available for the period of 2008-2013 which will be interpreted in relation to...

The history of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) is often considered to be tightly intertwined to that of European security, and late developments in European cooperation indeed seem to demonstrate that asylum has become first and foremost a matter of security in Europe. Yet, this tightening of policies contrasts with the flourishing of proposals claiming to mainstream equality throughout European legislation. This dissertation examines the way a politicized issue in the field of equality—LGBTI rights—has become incorporated into a cooperation mechanism that is itself divisive among Member States, the CEAS. It answers the following question: what does the European LGBTI asylum debate demonstrate about the role played by politicization in shaping the meaning and form taken by equality in European policies? Through a qualitative inquiry, it shows that while the CEAS has been a key space of renegotiation of LGBTI equality in Europe, this deepening came at the cost of the disarticulation of LGBTI emancipation from migrants’ rights. Contrarily to what has been assumed by the literature on homonationalism, this disarticulation was not strategically constructed by LGBTI activists. It rather originated from the predominance of the paradigm of “migration governance”, which depoliticizes exclusions and divides causes to better manage populations. Consequently, even though politicization is often perceived as a negative phenomenon by policymakers, this dissertation shows that what is needed to make the CEAS hold its promises of protection is not less, but more political debate. Only through this re-politicization will new and collective forms of equality emerge. / Le Régime d’Asile Européen Commun (RAEC) est souvent critiqué pour la vision sécuritaire de l’asile qu’il incarne. Il est vrai que son histoire reste marquée par la volonté des Etats-Membres de contrôler la mobilité humaine sur le sol européen. Toutefois, bien que les récents durcissements des politiques communautaires semblent confirmer cette sécuritisation du droit d’asile, ceux-ci contrastent avec l’affirmation croissante de la nécessité de « mainstreamer » le principe d’égalité au sein du droit européen. Prenant cette contradiction pour point de départ, cette thèse examine la manière dont un enjeu controversé au sein du champ de l’égalité – les droits LGBTI – fut incorporé au sein d’un mécanisme de coopération lui-même conflictuel pour les Etats-Membres, le RAEC. Elle répond à la question suivante : en quoi le débat européen sur l’asile LGBTI interroge-t-il le rôle joué par la politisation dans la redéfinition des politiques d’égalité en Europe ? A partir d’une enquête qualitative, cette thèse montre que si le RAEC fut un espace-clé de l’approfondissement de l’égalité LGBTI en Europe, ce fut au prix de la construction des droits LGBTI et des droits des migrants comme deux enjeux distincts. Cette division, toutefois, prend sa source non pas dans une instrumentalisation homonationaliste, mais plutôt dans les dispositifs dépolitisants de gouvernance et de triage des populations qui prédominent désormais au sein des politiques européennes, dépolitisant les exclusions et fragmentant les causes. Face à cette logique individualisante, seule la repolitisation du débat permettra d’inventer de nouvelles formes de politiques d’égalité porteuses d’émancipation collective.

This study offers a comprehensive comparative analysis of labour market integration policies for refugees in Sweden and Germany following the 2015 refugee crisis. Adapting an institutional approach that includes new historical institutionalism, rational choice institutionalism and sociological institutionalism, this study analyses the policy changes in both countries. The research design is a most similar design to compare and find differences and similarities in both countries, and the methodology is a qualitative comparative analysis. The research concentrates on the elements of policy change – displacement, layering, conversion and drift- to explain the modifications in response to the crisis. The study reveals significant similarities and differences between the two countries. Both Sweden and Germany implemented strategies to support refugee integration into the labour market, although with different approaches. The historical legacies, societal perspectives, and institutional frameworks of each country influenced the execution of these policies.

La crise du droit d’asile au sein de l’Union Européenne fait aujourd’hui l’objet de préoccupations récurrentes. En plus de celle-ci, les personnes qui recherchent une protection dans l’ « espace de liberté, de sécurité et de justice » de l’Union, se trouvent face à une autre crise, celle du droit à l’asile. A partir de ce constat, il est apparu pertinent de s’interroger sur les droits des demandeurs d’asile dans le cadre du régime d’asile européen commun (RAEC). Plus précisément, il s’agit de l’étude de l’effectivité des droits confrontés aux obstacles d’accès à l’Union Européenne et aux procédures d’asile de ses Etats membres, des droits liés à la procédure d’examen des demandes d’asile et des droits dont les personnes disposent pendant cet examen. La protection de ces droits, en plus du problème traditionnel de la mise en oeuvre des engagements internationaux au niveau national, a été confrontée à un nouveau régime régional ainsi qu’à une harmonisation ambiguë. A travers l’étude des droits, cette recherche vise à démontrer les causes de la crise et à proposer éventuellement des solutions orientées vers le respect du Droit International pour sortir de celle-ci, afin de contribuer à l’amélioration de la condition des demandeurs d’asile dans l’espace européen. A cet effet, notre approche est également comparatiste car l’examen des deux exemples concrets sert d’outil d’analyse, de réflexion et enfin d’évaluation du RAEC, qui a commencé à répartir les charges au sein de l’Union Européenne par le mécanisme de Dublin avant que les procédures d’examen des demandes d’asile ainsi que les conditions d’accueil dans les Etats membres aient été harmonisées. Une analyse de droit comparé entre deux Etats membres, en l’espèce la France et la Grèce, nous semble en effet s’imposer, afin de démontrer les enjeux actuels de l’harmonisation européenne en matière d’asile et d’éclairer les défis de la protection des droits. / The crisis of asylum law within the European Union is currently the subject of recurring concerns. In addition to that, people who seek protection in the "area of freedom, security and justice" of the European Union, face another crisis, that of the right to asylum. Following this observation, it seems relevant to consider the rights of asylum seekers under the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). More specifically, we study the effectiveness of rights before the obstacles of access to the European Union and its Member States’ asylum procedures, the rights related to the procedure for examining asylum applications and the rights accorded during this examination. The protection of these rights, in addition to the traditional problem of the implementation of international commitments at national level, was faced with a new regional system as well as an ambiguous harmonization. Through the study of human rights, this research aims to demonstrate the causes of the crisis, to propose possible solutions oriented to the respect of international law and contribute to the improvement of the status of asylum seekers in the European space. To this end, our approach is also comparative because the examination of two concrete examples is useful for analysis, reflection and finally evaluation of the CEAS, which began to distribute the burden in the European Union by the Dublin mechanism before the examination procedures and reception conditions in the member states have been harmonized. A comparative law analysis between two member states, France and Greece, it seems to be necessary in order to demonstrate the current challenges of European harmonization on asylum and illuminate the challenges of rights’ protection.Keywords :

Définie comme droit national puis comme droit communautaire depuis l’adoption de la Convention de Dublin en 1990 par les États membres, la politique d’asile de l’Union européenne est devenue indissociable de sa politique migratoire. Le contexte des arrivées massives d’exilés dans l’Union européenne au cours des années 2010 a permis à l’UE de renforcer l’intégration de la demande d’asile dans une politique sécuritaire en la hiérarchisant, la catégorisant et en renforçant l’externalisation de son traitement. Cependant, en confirmant le mécanisme « Dublin » qui appelle à la solidarité des États membres dans la prise en charge des demandeurs d’asile, l’Union européenne, qui formait jusque-là un bloc unifié institutionnellement autour des valeurs des droits de l’Homme et de la démocratie, est désormais traversée par des conflits qui laissent ouverte la question de l’intégration et du rejet des demandeurs d’asile et qui révèlent une crise plus large. / Defined as national law and then as Community law since the adoption of the Dublin Convention in 1990 by the Member States, the asylum policy of the European Union has become inseparable from its migration policy. The context of the mass influx of exiles into the European Union in the course of 2010 has allowed the EU to strengthen the integration of asylum demand into a security policy by prioritizing, categorizing and strengthening the outsourcing of its treatment. However, by confirming the « Dublin » mechanism which calls for the solidarity of the Member States in the care of asylum seekers, the European Union, which until then formed an institutionally unified blocaround the values of the human rights and democracy, is now crossed by conflicts that leave open the question of integration and rejection of asylum seekers and reveal a wider crisis.

Ce mémoire concerne le droit d’asile dans l’Union Européenne. Il s’agit non seulement d’une analyse législative de la mise en œuvre d’une politique européenne commune d’asile issue de la création de l’espace de liberté, sécurité et justice établi par le Traité d’Amsterdam, mais aussi de l’évaluation du niveau d’harmonisation atteint par cette politique au sein de l’Union, et enfin d’une réflexion sur la relation entre le processus de mise en œuvre de la politique commune d’asile d’une part, et le respect des droits fondamentaux des chercheurs et des demandeurs de la protection internationale par les États Membres et la Communauté d’autre part. / This thesis relates to the right of asylum in the European Union. It is not only a legislative analysis on the implementation of the Common European Asylum System as a consequence of the creation of an area of freedom, security and justice by the Amsterdam Treaty, but also it is an assessment of the harmonization level that this Common European Asylum System has reached within the EU, and finally it is an appraisal of the relationship between the implementation of this Common European Asylum System on one side and the respect for human rights of asylum seekers and international protection seekers by Member States and by the Community on the other side.

Ce mémoire concerne le droit d’asile dans l’Union Européenne. Il s’agit non seulement d’une analyse législative de la mise en œuvre d’une politique européenne commune d’asile issue de la création de l’espace de liberté, sécurité et justice établi par le Traité d’Amsterdam, mais aussi de l’évaluation du niveau d’harmonisation atteint par cette politique au sein de l’Union, et enfin d’une réflexion sur la relation entre le processus de mise en œuvre de la politique commune d’asile d’une part, et le respect des droits fondamentaux des chercheurs et des demandeurs de la protection internationale par les États Membres et la Communauté d’autre part. / This thesis relates to the right of asylum in the European Union. It is not only a legislative analysis on the implementation of the Common European Asylum System as a consequence of the creation of an area of freedom, security and justice by the Amsterdam Treaty, but also it is an assessment of the harmonization level that this Common European Asylum System has reached within the EU, and finally it is an appraisal of the relationship between the implementation of this Common European Asylum System on one side and the respect for human rights of asylum seekers and international protection seekers by Member States and by the Community on the other side.

This thesis explores the impact of the Syrian refugee crisis on the Common European Asylum System. It evaluates the extent to which the European Union was able to implement a common asylum system, identifies discrepancies between different European countries, primarily Germany and Hungary, and briefly examines the roots of these differences. To this end, the structure of the international refugee protection regime and the German and Hungarian asylum systems are analyzed. Furthermore, the thesis explores how the governments of the two countries perceive the rights of refugees and how their views have affected their handling of the crisis. The case studies of Germany and Hungary have revealed that the treatment of Syrian refugees varies enormously within the EU. Hence, the implementation of the Common European Asylum System has not been achieved, which can be attributed to the deficiencies within the system and the growing ideological rifts within the EU.