{"title":"差别待遇和临时保护安排:歧视还是合法区别?","authors":"Julia Kienast, Jens Vedsted-Hansen","doi":"10.1163/15718166-12340166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article analyses the differential treatment among refugees inherent to temporary protection arrangements. What was particularly remarkable in the EU’s response to displacement from Ukraine, for instance, was the free access for Ukrainians to EU territory and even free choice to seek protection in any Member State. Thus, the persons under this arrangement are better off initially, and this may seem preferable to the deterrence measures taken in response to other cases of ‘mass influx’ which restricted, rather than facilitated, access to protection. As it may in the longer term be better for some refugees to undergo the ordinary asylum procedure and eventually receive refugee or subsidiary protection status, temporary protection raises complex questions of differential treatment. At the same time, within the ordinary asylum procedure some EU Member States have introduced distinctions resulting in differential treatment of certain refugee categories whose need for protection is perceived to be temporary. This article positions the implementation of the various temporary protection arrangements within the general norms of non-discrimination by analysing key aspects of differential treatment and attempting to identify the boundary between lawful and unlawful distinctions.</p>","PeriodicalId":51819,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Migration and Law","volume":"245 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differential Treatment and Temporary Protection Arrangements: Discrimination or Legitimate Distinctions?\",\"authors\":\"Julia Kienast, Jens Vedsted-Hansen\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718166-12340166\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This article analyses the differential treatment among refugees inherent to temporary protection arrangements. What was particularly remarkable in the EU’s response to displacement from Ukraine, for instance, was the free access for Ukrainians to EU territory and even free choice to seek protection in any Member State. Thus, the persons under this arrangement are better off initially, and this may seem preferable to the deterrence measures taken in response to other cases of ‘mass influx’ which restricted, rather than facilitated, access to protection. As it may in the longer term be better for some refugees to undergo the ordinary asylum procedure and eventually receive refugee or subsidiary protection status, temporary protection raises complex questions of differential treatment. At the same time, within the ordinary asylum procedure some EU Member States have introduced distinctions resulting in differential treatment of certain refugee categories whose need for protection is perceived to be temporary. This article positions the implementation of the various temporary protection arrangements within the general norms of non-discrimination by analysing key aspects of differential treatment and attempting to identify the boundary between lawful and unlawful distinctions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51819,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Migration and Law\",\"volume\":\"245 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Migration and Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340166\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEMOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Migration and Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340166","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Differential Treatment and Temporary Protection Arrangements: Discrimination or Legitimate Distinctions?
This article analyses the differential treatment among refugees inherent to temporary protection arrangements. What was particularly remarkable in the EU’s response to displacement from Ukraine, for instance, was the free access for Ukrainians to EU territory and even free choice to seek protection in any Member State. Thus, the persons under this arrangement are better off initially, and this may seem preferable to the deterrence measures taken in response to other cases of ‘mass influx’ which restricted, rather than facilitated, access to protection. As it may in the longer term be better for some refugees to undergo the ordinary asylum procedure and eventually receive refugee or subsidiary protection status, temporary protection raises complex questions of differential treatment. At the same time, within the ordinary asylum procedure some EU Member States have introduced distinctions resulting in differential treatment of certain refugee categories whose need for protection is perceived to be temporary. This article positions the implementation of the various temporary protection arrangements within the general norms of non-discrimination by analysing key aspects of differential treatment and attempting to identify the boundary between lawful and unlawful distinctions.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Migration and Law is a quarterly journal on migration law and policy with specific emphasis on the European Union, the Council of Europe and migration activities within the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe. This journal differs from other migration journals by focusing on both the law and policy within the field of migration, as opposed to examining immigration and migration policies from a wholly sociological perspective. The Journal is the initiative of the Centre for Migration Law of the University of Nijmegen, in co-operation with the Brussels-based Migration Policy Group.