1 Relocation as a Solution to the EU Migration Crisis Abstract Asylum law has traditionally been perceived as a sensitive area of state policy. For this very reason, for a long time, it was mostly excluded from the process of European integration. However, the development of the internal market and the removal of internal borders have ultimately necessitated some degree of harmonisation of asylum and migration policies amongst the Member States. Consequently, there have been several major increases in EU competence in the field of asylum and migration since the 1990s. This has eventually led to the creation of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). Yet, a prolonged lack of political will to introduce a major reform of the CEAS and to duly implement the principle of solidarity has over the years resulted in serious systemic deficiencies. These defects, in particular the uneven distribution of responsibility between the Member States, have fully shown during the EU migration crisis. This far-reaching crisis has translated into several ad hoc solutions, including the use of an emergency EU competence to adopt temporary measures under Art. 78(3) SFEU (ex Art. 64(2) TEC), which had not been used until then. The adoption of two Council relocation decisions in September 2015 has raised numerous legal questions...

Les actes délégués ont été introduits en droit de l’Union européenne à la suite de l’adoption du traité de Lisbonne. Définis à l’article 290 TFUE comme des « actes non législatifs de portée générale qui complètent ou modifient certains éléments non essentiels de l'acte législatif », les actes délégués apparaissent prima facie comme un instrument d’exécution du droit de l’Union, dans la continuité de la comitologie préexistante au traité de Lisbonne. Ils se distinguent pourtant des actes d’exécution de l’article 291 TFUE, qui sont adoptés « lorsque des conditions uniformes d'exécution des actes juridiquement contraignants de l'Union sont nécessaires ». Les actes délégués semblent ainsi formellement exclus de la fonction d’exécution. Par déduction, ils devraient alors participer à l’exercice de la fonction législative. Cette conclusion n’a cependant rien d’évident dès lors que les actes délégués sont qualifiés « d’actes non législatifs ». L’étude des actes délégués a pour objectif de clarifier cette apparente contradiction et démontrer que l’objet de la procédure de délégation de pouvoir induite par l’article 290 TFUE est de transférer des compétences de nature législative entre le Parlement européen et le Conseil d’une part, et la Commission d’autre part. Cette étude conduit à observer les incidences institutionnelles et substantielles des actes délégués pour évaluer leurs effets sur la production normative de l’Union. / Delegated acts have been introduced into European Union law following the adoption of the Lisbon treaty. Defined by article 290 TFEU as “non-legislative acts of general application to supplement or amend certain non-essential elements of the legislative act”, delegated acts appear prima facie as an instrument of implementation of EU law, in continuity with the comitology that existed before the Lisbon treaty. However, delegated acts differ from the implementing acts as defined by article 291 TFEU which are adopted “where uniform conditions for implementing legally binding Union acts are needed”. Delegated acts thereby seem to be excluded from executive function. Instead, they should by deduction take part in the exercise of legislative function. This hypothesis is however not evident since delegated acts are referred to as “non-legislative acts”. The purpose of this thesis is to clarify this apparent contradiction and demonstrate that the aim of the delegation procedure under article 290 TFEU is to transfer a legislative power from the European Parliament and the Council to the Commission. This thesis assesses the institutional and substantive implications of delegated acts and their effects on the normative production of the Union.