Migratory pressure from abroad and populist trends in Europe have already put considerable stress on borderless Europe, despite the open borders being one of its most precious achievements. But what in the past could be seen as annoying yet temporary disturbances attained an entirely different character under the Danish initiative launched in early May 2011. The move to install permanent controls, including customs houses and video surveillance, alarmed not just Brussels but also travellers and business associations EU-wide.

This paper critically examines the policy implications of the ongoing Canada-Czech Republic visa dispute for the founding principles of the EU’s immigration and asylum policies, notably those of reciprocity and solidarity. It addresses the main challenges posed by the unilateral reintroduction of visa requirements for nationals of the Czech Republic for the EU’s common visa policy, and for the fundamental rights of European citizens who belong to vulnerable and excluded groups, i.e. Roma, in search of international protection.

This study contrasts the current role of customs at the EU’s external borders with the role it was intended to perform according to international standards in border management. There is a considerable imbalance between the involvement of customs and border guards, which impedes the smooth operation of border control and poses security risks for the Union and its citizens, including terrorist attacks. This paper analyses the causes of this imbalance and proposes appropriate solutions that are in line with international standards.

This Liberty & Security paper argues that for the EU’s Global Approach to Migration to address its unfinished elements and policy incoherencies, the European Union needs to develop common policy strategies focused on: first, new enforcement and independent evaluation mechanisms on the implementation of the European law on free movement, borders and migration, and the compatibility of EU member states and EU agencies’ actions with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.

This Liberty and Security working paper seeks to understand the reasons behind the considerable complications facing the project to develop a new, second generation version of the Schengen Information System (SIS II). Despite the centrality of this large-scale EU database for immigration and border control purposes and the increasing prioritisation of security technologies within the EU’s internal security strategy, the project has encountered substantial delays, an escalating budget, political crises and criticisms of the new system’s potential impact on fundamental rights.

The European Commission published in November 2010 a Communication aiming at putting the EU Internal Security Strategy (ISS) into action. The Communication envisages five key strategic objectives for the EU’s internal security: disrupt organised crime, prevent terrorism, raise levels of security in cyberspace, strengthen external borders management and increase the EU’s resilience to natural disasters.

This working paper analyses the flow of Roma migrants, in particular asylum seekers, from the Czech Republic and Hungary to Canada in 1996–2010. Although the fate of the Roma is at the centre of events, statistics on asylum applications along with an interpretation of the history of migration issues, from the perspectives of both international relations and EU policy, illustrate the classical debate on state sovereignty versus universal or at least European solidarity. They reflect the debate on the binding human rights of fragile groups versus security preconditions and prejudices.

This paper examines state protection as applied to the Roma minority group in the Czech Republic and the link to Roma refugee claimants in Canada. The paper traces measures implemented by the Czech national authorities to improve the situation of the Roma, but also continuing problems of discrimination and violence by state and non-state actors.

The relationship between EU policy and the rights of undocumented migrants remains in tension. The status and treatment granted to undocumented migrants continues to be ‘invisible’ in EU policy strategies and responses. This is so despite the wide recognition and evidence of the vulnerability and insecurities these persons face in their access to fundamental rights.

It is no longer sensible to regard biometrics as having neutral socio-economic, legal and political impacts. Newer generation biometrics are fluid and include behavioural and emotional data that can be combined with other data.

The Stockholm Programme and the European Commission’s Action Plan implementing it have positioned the freedom, security and justice of ‘European citizens’ at the heart of the EU’s political agenda for the next five years. Yet, who are the ‘citizens’ about whom the Council and the European Commission are so interested? At first sight it would appear as if only those individuals holding the nationality of a member state would fall within this category.

Where is the fault line between law and politics in anti-terrorism measures? Clearly it is at the junction with individual rights. This paper examines the problem from the perspective of how the individual becomes visible as a rights holder and where. At stake is the organising principle of international relations and international law.
Elspeth Guild is Senior Research Fellow at CEPS and Jean Monnet ad personam Professor at Radboud University, Nijmegen. This paper was first presented at the International Studies Association Conference in New Orleans, 17-20 February 2010.

Undocumented migrants are one of the most vulnerable groups in the EU. This report assesses the main findings and synergies of a selection of EU-funded research projects on irregular immigration and the status of undocumented migrants. It reveals that the results emanating from social science research contrast with the EU policy documents adopted in light of the forthcoming Stockholm Programme – the third multi-annual programme on an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice.

In December 2008, the EU Council adopted the so-called ‘Returns Directive’ with the aim of devising common standards and procedures to be applied in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals. Among its more controversial provisions are the exclusion of some irregular migrants from its scope, the possibility to detain a migrant for a period up to 18 months, the possibility of a re-entry ban into the EU for a period of 5 years and the chance to detain and return unaccompanied minors.