La protección del menor no acompañado solicitante de asilo: entre estado competente y estado responsable
ISSN: 1989-4570
Year of publication: 2017
Volume: 9
Issue: 2
Pages: 482-505
Type: Article
More publications in: Cuadernos de derecho transnacional
Abstract
The Common European Asylum System (CEAS) instruments of second generation incorporate the child’s best interests as a primary consideration. Accordingly, they provide for measures to protect minors, in particular unaccompanied ones, to be adopted firstly by the Member State which determines the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection, and then by the latter Member State. Inspired as well by the best interests of the child, the Brussels II bis regulation sets the rules on international jurisdiction in matters of parental responsibility. The convergence begs the question of the interface between the texts. If the examination results in a lack of alignment among the instruments that may adversely affect the individuals they are meant to protect it will be necessary to reflect on how to resolve the conflict.
Bibliographic References
- A. de Palma del Teso, “La condición de menor no acompañado en nuestro Derecho de extranjería: definición común en la Unión Europea. La kafala del Derecho islámico”, Revista Vasca de Administración Pública, 2011
- A. Borrás, “Art. 8”, en U. Magnus, P. Mankowski (eds.), Brussels IIbis Regulation, Sellier, Munich, 2012
- A. Fernández Pérez, “Medidas prioritarias de protección de los menores migrantes en la Unión Europea”, La Ley Unión Europea, núm. 48.mayo de 2017
- M. Bossi, L. Demirdache, “When Children Seek Asylum from Their Parents : A Canadian Case Study”, en A. Orgocka, C. Clark-Kazak (eds.), Independent Child Migration- Insights into Agency, Vulnerabilty, and Structure. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 136
- M. Sedmak, T. Žakelj, Z. Medarić, B. Lenarčič, In Whose Best Interest? Exploring Unaccompanied Minors’ Rights Through the Lens of Migration and Asylum Processes (MinAs), Informe comparativo relativo a Austria, Francia, Eslovenia y RU, 2015, pp. 42-43, en http://www.minasproject.eu/files/2014/10/A7_Comparative-qualitative-report.pdf
- M. Requejo Isidro, “El derecho al respeto a la vida privada y familiar y el secuestro internacional de menores. Los Estados miembros de la UE ante el TEDH: estado de la cuestión (2016)”, Anuario de los cursos de Derechos Humanos de Donostia-San Sebastián, Volumen XVI, Aranzadi, en prensa
- C. Hruschka, F. Maiaini, “Dublin III Regulation (EU) Nº 604/2013”, en K. Hailbronner, D. Thym (eds.), EU Immigration and Asylum Law, 2ª ed., C.H. Beck, Hart, Nomos, Munich, 2016
- C. Lass, Der Flüchtling im deutschen Internationalen Privatrecht, C.H.Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Munich, 1995
- K. Riegner, “Die Vertretung unbegleiteter minderjähriger Flüchtlinge in asyl-und ausländerrechtlichen Angelegenheiten”, NZFam, 2014
- P. Mankowski, “Dual and Multiple Nationals, Stateless Persons and refugees”, en S. Leible (ed.), General principles of European Private International Law, Wolters Kluwer, 2016
- E. Pataut, “Art. 13”, en U. Magnus, P. Mankowski (eds.), Brussels IIbis Regulation, Sellier, Munich, 2012
- I. Kraft, “Asylum Qualification Directive 2011/95/EU- Arts. 11 to 14”, en K. Hailbronner, D. Thym (eds.), EU Immigration and Asylum Law, 2ª ed., C.H. Beck, Hart, Nomos, Munich, 2016
- I. Claro Quintáns, I. Lázaro González, “Cuestiones de Derecho de extranjería y de la protección internacional en la vida de los niños”, en C. Martínez García (Coord.), Tratado del menor. La protección jurídica a la infancia y la adolescencia, Aranzadi, 2016
- F. Timmermans y V. Jourovà a Lord Boswell of Aynho, el 6 de diciembre de 2016, C (2016) 7829 Final (http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/3/2016/EN/C-2016-7829-F1-EN-MAIN.PDF
- K. Hailbronner, D. Thym, “Legal Framework for EU Asylum Policy”, en K. Hailbronner, D.Thym (eds.), EU Immigration and Asylum Law, 2ª ed., C.H. Beck, Hart, Nomos, Munich, 2016
- F. Maiani, “The Dublin III Regulation: A New Legal Framework for a More Humane System?”, en V. Chetail, Ph. De Bruycker, F. Maiani (eds.), Reforming the Common European Asylum System, Brill/Nijhoff, Leiden, 2016
- J. Doek, H. van Loon P. Vlaardingerbroek (eds.), Martinus Nijhoff, La Haya, 1996
- M.Ph. Weller, B. Rentsch, “Habitual Residence: A Plea for Settled Intention”, en S. Leible (ed.), General principles of European Private International Law, Wolters Kluwer, 2016
- A. Fiorini, “The Protection of the Best Interests of Migrant Children - Private International Law Perspectives”, en G Biagioni & F Ippolito (eds), Migrant Children in the XXI Century. Selected Issues of Public and Private International Law, Series “La ricerca del diritto”, Editoriale Scientifica, 2016
- U. Spellenberg, “Art. 1”, en Staudinger, EheGVO, 2010, nota 29. En contra, S. Arnold, “Art. 1”, en C. Althammer (ed.), Brüssel IIa/Rom III. Kommentar, C.H. Beck, 2014
- V. Chetail, “Les relations entre droit international privé et droit international des réfugiés: histoire d’une brève rencontré”, JDI, 2014
- V. van den Eeckhout, “Private international law questions that arise in the relation between migration law (in the broad sense of the word) and family law: subjection of PIL to policies of migration law”, Background paper- PILAGG-Presentation, 24 de enero de 2013, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2203729
- W. Pintens, “Art. 1”, en U. Magnus, P. Mankowski (eds.), Brussels IIbis Regulation, Sellier, Munich, 2012
- D. Schäuble, “Art. 13”, en C. Althammer (ed.), Brüssel IIa/Rom III. Kommentar, C.H. Beck, Munich, 2014
- P. Mankowski, “Die Reaktion des Internationalen Privatrechts auf neue Erscheinungsformen der Migration”, IPRax, 2017