Project description
Local and supranational courts in asylum proceedings
States rely on pushbacks, fences, detention measures, and the externalisation of asylum proceedings to prevent refugees from accessing asylum. Since no international court is specifically dedicated to interpreting the 1951 Refugee Convention (RC), the responsibility falls upon domestic and supranational courts to assess the compatibility of these barriers with the RC and other human rights instruments. Funded by the European Research Council, the ACCESS project aims to present an empirically driven theoretical model that explores how domestic and supranational courts interpret these barriers. In doing so, the project aims to uncover different patterns in court rulings, their impact on asylum access, and the socio-legal factors at play. Furthermore, ACCESS will investigate how courts shape international refugee law in response to these challenges, offering crucial insights into the future of refugees' rights.
Objective
Pushbacks, walls, fences, detention measures and externalisation of asylum proceedings are the most widespread barriers that States around the globe implement to keep refugees out, and consequently prevent their access to international protection. In a global refugee context lacking an international court to interpret the 1951 Refugee Convention (RC), the burden of assessing the compatibility of these barriers with the RC lies on domestic and supranational courts. These separate jurisdictions are interpreting the same treaty, are often presented with similar factual circumstances, and have a duty to uphold the rule of law. Yet, we do not know if courts around the globe have systematically yielded similar or different interpretations on the compatibility of State-developed barriers with the RC; and if common patterns have developed, whether or not they uphold those barriers in light of the RC. Despite these overarching problems, the literature has, so far, had a piecemeal approach; we thus lack an empirically driven socio-legal comparative analysis of the role of courts in interpreting the right to access asylum.
ACCESS will introduce an empirically driven theoretical model of how domestic and supranational courts develop international refugee law (IRL) and advance the executive driven model of migration governance in response to State-developed barriers. More specifically, we will investigate: 1) how do judges apply the same legal treaty (RC) and related international norms in different political and socio-legal contexts?; 2) to what extent are there any discernible patterns in the courts decisions related to barriers to asylum (either restricting or expanding access to asylum)?; 3) what are the socio-legal factors influencing adjudication?; and 4) how have courts developed IRL in response to these barriers?
Given that we are faced with the highest displacement figures on record and the increasing barriers to asylum, ACCESS is of topical importance.
Fields of science (EuroSciVoc)
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
- social sciences sociology governance
- social sciences sociology demography human migrations
- social sciences law
You need to log in or register to use this function
We are sorry... an unexpected error occurred during execution.
You need to be authenticated. Your session might have expired.
Thank you for your feedback. You will soon receive an email to confirm the submission. If you have selected to be notified about the reporting status, you will also be contacted when the reporting status will change.
Keywords
Project’s keywords as indicated by the project coordinator. Not to be confused with the EuroSciVoc taxonomy (Fields of science)
Project’s keywords as indicated by the project coordinator. Not to be confused with the EuroSciVoc taxonomy (Fields of science)
Programme(s)
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
-
HORIZON.1.1 - European Research Council (ERC)
MAIN PROGRAMME
See all projects funded under this programme
Topic(s)
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Funding Scheme
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
HORIZON-ERC - HORIZON ERC Grants
See all projects funded under this funding scheme
Call for proposal
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
(opens in new window) ERC-2022-STG
See all projects funded under this callHost institution
Net EU financial contribution. The sum of money that the participant receives, deducted by the EU contribution to its linked third party. It considers the distribution of the EU financial contribution between direct beneficiaries of the project and other types of participants, like third-party participants.
40126 Bologna
Italy
The total costs incurred by this organisation to participate in the project, including direct and indirect costs. This amount is a subset of the overall project budget.