RAIR Foundation
When does an asylum seeker forfeit their protection status? According to the European Court of Justice (ECJ), a long criminal career is not enough: “particularly serious” crimes that pose a “serious threat” to the local community are required, according to the Luxembourg judges.
The UN Refugee Convention is quite clear on refugees’ rights and obligations. Anyone who applies for protection in another country and is granted it must also submit to local customs and observe the norms and laws there. An asylum seeker is therefore expected to behave like a good guest, no more and no less. But the European Court of Justice obviously sees things a little differently.
After courts in Belgium, Austria, and the Netherlands made inquiries to clarify when a member state can withdraw refugee status from foreign criminals, the judges in Luxembourg have now ruled. Under EU law, the court said that member states can only refuse or withdraw refugee status from people who meet two important requirements. First, they must “have been convicted of an offense considered by the competent authorities to be particularly serious,” and second, the person must pose a “real, present, and sufficiently serious threat” to the local community.
The fact that the person has been convicted of a serious crime is not in itself sufficient to meet the second requirement, the court added. And not only that: the member states would also have to take into account the principle of proportionality and weigh the interests of the asylum seeker against those of the receiving state. However, according to the Luxembourg judges, the authorities of the member states are not obliged to take into account the consequences of a return to the home country of the persons concerned.
However, what makes deportation even more difficult is the fact that, according to the judges, a combination of individual crimes does not affect the degree of seriousness. Even if asylum seekers are conspicuous with countless “minor” crimes such as physical harm, burglaries, thefts, muggings, drug offenses, and the like, it doesn’t matter. According to the Luxembourg judges, the individual offenses in themselves are not enough to forfeit refugee status, virtually giving criminal migrant gangs a license. Their rights appear to be heavier in Europe than those of citizens who want to live in security.
Amy Mek
Vlad Tepes
Hmmm, sounds like the Euro-judges are corrupt. Or blackmailed by sex extortion, bribery, compromised, or leveraged. We have sh*thead judges here too. Everywhere the same now. The
Justice systemhas become The Injustice System!I bet pimp-daddy mohamhead has the judge’s name in his blackbook too. Ha!
Let’s dump the refugees where the judges live.
There is more than one way to neutralize a threat when the rule of law becomes a clown car. Use the one appropriate to the situation. Be silent, be deadly…the rest of the savages will get the message.
Almost all EU member states have ratified the UN Migration Pact and also the EU Migration Pact. Basically, they can’t help themselves because they have a contractual obligation to do so. The reason for this: bought politicians and infected governments.
As for the withdrawal of the protected status of delinquent gold pieces, one can only say one thing, Europe encourages crime and the destruction of its societies with such decisions.
In their countries of origin, these people would rot in jail or be expelled from the country!
As a European living in South Africa, if I were to commit a crime, I would receive immediate assistance in gathering my travel essentials and be escorted to the plane after a stint in jail, depending on the crime. Also I would have to pay for the ticket myself, and if I didn’t have the money, my time in jail would be prolonged until the money for the ticket had been acquired.
But in Europe, migrant crime is sanctioned by “LAW” and pays big dividends to the criminals. What a complete dumpster fire that place has become.