The European Council

Report as inappropriate Your report has been received

Shared by: HC120727071831

Tags

Stats

views:: 2
posted:: 7/27/2012
language:
pages:: 19

Public Domain

Document Sample

The Thirty-First Annual
Virginia Model United Nations Conference
Presents…

The European Council
Swati Teerdhala Anna-Sofia Yurtaslan
Undersecretary- General Chair
for GA’s and Specialized Committees

Table of Contents
I. The European Union ..................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.3
II. The European Council ............................................................................................................ 6
III. Topic 1: The Free Movement of the Sinti and Roma .......................................................... 9
IV. Topic 2: The Schengen Agreement and Migrants ..............Error! Bookmark not defined.11
V. Helpful Resources ...................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.13
VI. Bibliography...........................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.17
Dear Delegates,

My name is Anna-Sofia Yurtaslan, and I am a Danish third year studying
Global Development and Foreign Affairs. I love the crazy and vibrant region of South
Asia where I grew up, but I am just as passionate about the region I come from,
Europe. I was first introduced to Model UN in High School, and I quickly realized
how much I loved it. MUN combines many of my favorite things: debate, current
events and new people! I helped found the MUN club at my first college, the
University of Aberdeen in Scotland. After I transferred to UVA, in August 2010, I got
involved with the International Relations Organization (IRO), Vice Chairing for
VAMUN XXX and joining the secretariat for our college conference VICS XVI as
Charge. Secretariat was a delightful experience and in April, I was elected Secretary-
General for VICS XVII!

I have an obvious interest in the European Union since it has the power to
enact legislation that is binding on my home country, Denmark. The EU is the
ultimate supranational organization, and therefore one of the most interesting
international organizations to study. Much like the United Nations, the EU is
composed of several different organs, but for the purpose of this simulation, we will
be reenacting the European Council. The Council defines the Union’s directions and
priorities, exercising what can be called “constitution-making” powers (ex. it can
suspend the membership of a state, set out the criteria a state must meet if it wishes to
join the EU, instigate treaty reform, etc). Its power lies in the fact that it is comprised
of 27 heads of state, one per member state of the European Union. As a delegate, you
will have to grapple with the personality of the politician you are representing, the
national interests of your country as well as the interests of the EU.

The topics we will be discussing are ones that I am personally very interested
in. Migration to the EU and within the EU are both very controversial and
complicated topics. I believe it is the responsibility of developed countries to support
those who are less privileged, yet reality is rarely that simple. Can migrants to a
country become properly integrated? How can nationalist (and often xenophobic)
sentiments among the local population be appeased? Europe is still emerging from the
economic meltdown with 24 million people remaining unemployed—this makes it
difficult for governments to justify allowing in hundreds of thousands of migrants.
The constant struggle between European Union law and national law provides a
brilliant insight into the complexity of international relations, even within the
framework of the one of the most integrated international organizations.

I hope you will enjoy and invest yourself in the topics even half as much as I
have! In this background guide, I am providing some specific case studies through
which to look migration, but you should under no circumstances feel limited.
Researching other cases where a member state has potentially (or actually) breached
European Union law regarding deportation, immigration, border control, and any
other related topics will only enhance debate.

You can email me at any point with questions at aoy7ns@virginia.edu!

Anna-Sofia O. Yurtaslan
THE EUROPEAN UNION

History of the European Union
The European Union is a institutions for all three communities,
political and economic union commonly referred to as the European
composed of 27 member states. It was Community (EC). The first
originally created with the purpose of enlargement of the EC occurred in
ending the frequent and brutal wars 1973 when Denmark, Ireland and the
between neighboring states that United Kingdom joined. Norway had
culminated in the Second World War. negotiated to join at the same time, but
Extreme nationalism was the source of voters rejected this in a referendum.
Europe’s devastation, and therefore The first direct democratic elections to
European integration was seen as a the European Parliament were held in
safer alternative. The European Coal 1979. The EC continued to expand
and Steel Community (ECSC), which over the next years with Greece joining
was declared to be “a first step in the in 1981 and Spain along with Portugal
federation of Europe”, was an early in 1986.
attempt at integration. The The Schengen Agreement,
interdependence was created by created in 1985, led the way to the
pooling national resources all with the creation of open borders without
purpose of eliminating the threat of passport controls between most
war between member states. There member states and even some non-
were six founding members: Belgium, member states. This was followed, a
France, West Germany, Italy, year later, by the creation of the
Luxembourg and the Netherlands. In European flag and the Single European
1957, these same six countries signed Act. After the fall of the Iron Curtain in
the Treaties of Rome, extending their 1990, a new era opened up Europe, and
cooperation by founding the European former East Germany became part of
Economic Community (ECC) and the the Community as part of the newly
European Atomic Energy Community united Germany. Enlargement towards
(Euratom). The ECC would develop a Eastern and Central Europe now
customs union between the members became an important part of the EC
and Euratom would integrate nuclear agenda, and the Copenhagen criteria
energy sectors. Though these two new for candidate members were
communities were created separately established.
from the ECSC, they shared the same The European Union was first
courts and the Common Assembly. The formally established on November 1,
ECSC and the Treaties of Rome started 1993 when the Maastricht Treaty came
to unite European countries both into force. In 1995 Finland, Sweden
economically and politically in order to and Austria joined the newly
secure lasting peace. established EU. In 2002, a new
In the 1960s, tensions began to currency was introduced, the euro, and
appear with France backtracking with it replaced the national currencies in 12
regard to integration by seeking to of the member states. The eurozone
limit supranational power. An has since then increased to encompass
agreement, however, was reached in 17 countries. The EU’s largest
1965, leading to the signing of the enlargement to date was in 2004 when
Merger Treaty of 1967 in Brussels. Malta, Cyprus, Slovenia, Estonia,
This new treaty created a single set of Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, the Czech
Republic, Slovakia and Hungary membership criteria require a
joined. Romania and Bulgaria became candidate country to have achieved:
the newest members to the EU when  Stability of institutions
they joined in 2007. Slovenia adopted guaranteeing democracy, the
the euro that same year, followed by rule of law, human rights and
Cyprus and Malta in 2008; Slovakia in respect for and protection of
2009 and Estonia in 2011. minorities;
The Lisbon Treaty entered into  The existence of a functioning
force in December 2009, reforming market economy as well as the
many aspects of the EU. Above all, capacity to cope with
Lisbon changed the legal structure of competitive pressure and
the Union, merging the three EU pillar market forces within the
system into one single legal entity Union;
provisioned with a legal personality.  The ability to take on the
Furthermore, it created the permanent obligations of membership
position of President of the European including adherence to the
Council (Herman Van Rompuy), and a aims of political, economic
strengthened High Representative and monetary union.
(Catherine Ashton). According to the 1995, Madrid
European Council the candidate
The Member States of the European country must have created the
Union conditions for its integration through
The European Union is the adjustment of its administrative
currently composed of 27 sovereign structures. This is due to the
nations: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, importance of legislation being
Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, effectively implemented through the
Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, appropriate administrative and judicial
Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, structures.
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Currently there are five official
Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, candidate countries: Turkey, Croatia,
Republic of Ireland, Romania, Macedonia, Montenegro and Iceland.
Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Four Western European countries are
and the United Kingdom. The not EU members but have partially
membership of the Union has grown committed to its economy and
from its original six founding members regulations: Iceland, Norway,
as countries have acceded to the Liechtenstein and Switzerland.
treaties, thereby pooling their
sovereignty in exchange for The Politics of the European Union
representation in the EU institutions. The European Union operates
In 1993, at the Copenhagen within the competencies that the
European Council, the Union decided treaties confer upon it. It functions
that countries in “Central and Eastern according to the principle of
Europe that so desire shall become subsidiarity—the EU only takes action
members of the European Union”, when an objective cannot be
making enlargement an issue of sufficiently achieved by member states
“when” rather than “if”. At the same on their own. Laws passed by EU
time, the Union defined its institutions take a variety of different
membership criteria, often referred to forms, but generally fit into one of two
as the Copenhagen criteria. The categories: those that come into force
without national implementation
measures and those that specifically policy of the eurozone. The Court of
require national implementation Justice of the European Union
measures. interprets and applies EU law and
The EU is comprised of seven treaties. The Union also has several
different institutions: the European bodies that advise or operate in specific
Parliament, the Council of the policy areas.
European Union, the European
Commission, the European Council,
the European Central Bank, the Court
of Justice and the European Bank of
Auditors. The power of scrutiny and
amending legislation is divided
between the European Parliament and
the Council of the European Union.
The European Commission functions
as the main executive branch, but the
European Council also has executive
power in limited areas. The European
Central Bank governs the monetary
THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL

Background Information of the leader they are playing, and the
The European Council was first positions on European policy that this
legally recognized in 1986 and is the leader takes. Furthermore, the delegate
discussion platform of the political should be clear as to the role that the
hierarchy of the European Union. It is European Council plays in the policy-
composed of the 27 heads of state and making process of the EU, having
is chaired by a permanent Presidency. specific proposals and objectives in
It only deals with issues of the highest mind.
political importance, generally ones During the simulation, each
that were not solved by previous delegate should make decisions based
negotiations. It is a forum where the on the current political forces and
leaders of EU member states meet: pressures active in their member state
 To provide overall strategic and the national interests of the country
direction and consistency to the they are representing.
EU by discussing and deciding
the overall character and goals Format
of the Union, In the Council meeting
 To resolve problems which the chamber, heads of government are
Council of Ministers and the seated in no specific order, with the
Commission have been unable President of the European Council at
to resolve, thus acting as the the head of the table. Often foreign
“supreme arbitrator”, ministers would also be included in
 To provide political impetus to these Council meetings, but due to size
European integration by constraints, only heads of state will be
developing and encouraging represented in our simulation.
new initiatives, Delegates are to debate views,
 To develop a Common Foreign ideas and proposals of Council
and Security Policy (CFSP)— members with the goal of agreeing to a
Council conclusions almost formal set of Conclusions of the
always include a statement of Presidency. Suggestions for the content
positions on foreign policy of the final Conclusions are to be
issues. discussed and drafted in the early
As such, the European Council has the sessions and then agreed upon just like
power and authority to main issues and in standard MUN simulations.
reaches key decisions.
The Council meets a minimum Rules of Procedure
of two times per years, taking place in The European Council has no
the member state holding the formal rules of procedure due to the
Presidency of the Council of Ministers. fact that the heads of state generally
The meetings usually last no more than want to decide how best to manage
ten hours, spaced over a 24-hour their meetings. Council meetings are
period. purposefully kept informal and
flexible, with many of the key
Preparation discussions taking play outside of the
Each delegate should prepare as well chamber. Nonetheless, for the sake of
as they can in advance with regards to this simulation the following rules will
the member state they are representing, apply:
the personal and political background
Chair All member states have the
The Chair will be the appointed power of veto if its leaders feel that
full-time President of the European critical national interests are at stake
Council (Herman Van Rompuy of with regard to the issue at hand. Keep
Belgium). The Chair will have the sole in mind that the veto is very rarely
power to open and close sessions, used, and is always controversial.
recognize speakers, place limits on European Council decisions are
floor times, and control discussion and not legally binding, but are binding in
debate. The agenda will be decided by a moral, political and pragmatic sense.
the Chair in consultation with other The European Commission may later
members of the European Council. turn elements of the Council’s
Conclusions into law.
Vice-Chair
The Vice-Chair will be the General Rules of Procedure
representative of the member state who Terms: delegates should take care to
is currently holding the position of distinguish between the European
High Representative of the Union for Community (EC) and the European
Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Union (EU). They should also note the
(Catherine Ashton of Great Britain). distinction between the Council of
The Vice-Chair will assume the powers Ministers and the European Council
of the Chair should the Chair not be when using the term “the Council”.
present. Delegate
Voting: When votes are taken, they
Voting Procedure should be open and made by roll call
The Council does not normally and recorded by the Vice Chair. The
take formal votes; instead, it tries to Chair will be the last called to vote.
reach its decisions through consensus: Voting will be verbal and expressed as
a general agreement on a topic where either “Yes”, “No” or “Abstain”. Once
those in opposition are prepared to all votes have been cast, the Vice chair
allow the Council to adopt the will tally the votes and immediately
measures without recourse to a vote. announce the result.
Reservations and objections may be Speaking: any delegate wishing to
recorded, but the Council as a whole address the Council must his/her
will agree to proceed. placard and wait to be recognized by
When consensus cannot be the Chair. Speaking out of turn is not
reached, votes are taken as a last resort, acceptable. Delegates must remain
with each member state having one seated while speaking. Delegates
vote and a simple majority prevailing. should address each other through the
A device known as a tour de table may Chair.
also be used, at the discretion of the Temporary Adjournment: a Chair or a
Chair. The Chair asks each head of delegate may call for a temporary
state in turn to give a short summary adjournment of a meeting for a
(up to 2 minutes) of their thoughts on specified amount of time (no more than
the issue being discussed, thus 10 minutes) and (if necessary) give
ensuring that every member state is one-minute speech explaining his/her
given the chance to outline its position, rationale. If at least two delegates
and allowing the Chair to determine second the motion, it will immediately
whether a compromise is possible. be put to a vote, requiring the support
However, it can be time consuming. of the majority of delegates to succeed.
This temporary adjournment will running in a manner contrary to these
function like an unmoderated caucus. Rules, he/she may rise to a point of
Closure of Debate: Generally, the order. The Chair may overrule, or
Chair will decide on the closure of a accept the appeal. If accepted, the
debate, but a delegate may move for Chair may make an immediate ruling,
closure, and (if necessary) be given a or ask the delegate to speak on the
maximum of one minute to explain point of order for a maximum of one
his/her rationale. If at least two other minute (but he/she may not speak on
delegates second the motion, it will the subject of the debate). The Chair
immediately be put to vote, requiring will then immediately rule on the point
the support of the majority to succeed. of order.
The Chair will declare the debate Point of Information: If a delegate
closed if the vote is successful. wishes to obtain a clarification of
Closure of Meeting: The Chair will procedure or of any other matter,
normally decide on the closure of a he/she may rise to a point of
meeting, but a delegate may move for information and receive clarification
closure, and (if necessary) be given a from the Chair or anyone else
maximum of one minute to explain designated by the Chair.
his/her rationale. If at least two other Point of Personal Privilege: If a
delegates second the motion, it will delegate wishes to raise a question,
immediately be put to a vote, and leave the room for an extended time, or
requires unanimity to be successful. make a request relating to personal
The Chair will then close the meeting comfort or their treatment by other
if the vote is successful. delegates, he/she may rise to a point of
Point of Order: If, during a meeting, a personal privilege and receive an
delegate feels that the meeting is immediate ruling by the Chair.
TOPIC A: FREE MOVEMENT OF THE SINTI AND ROMA

European Union Legislation on put in place on the grounds of public
Residency health, public security or public policy.
All citizens of the European
Union are allowed, by law, to move Recent Social Developments
and reside freely within the territory of Approximately ten million
all member states. In addition, citizens Roma reside within Europe, primarily
of the EU have the right to reside in a in the Central and Eastern European
host of member states for a period not Countries (CEEC) (Council of Europe,
exceeding three months without being 2007). The Roma initially lived on the
subject to any conditions other than Indian subcontinent, but they
possession of a valid identity card or immigrated to Europe as early as the
passport. There are, however, 11th century. They have been the target
conditions to being allowed to reside for both social discrimination and
for a period exceeding three months in stigmatization ever since. Bulgaria and
order to prevent individuals from Romania are the countries that have the
burdening the social security system in largest Roma populations—they
the host member state. Consequently it constitute ~3-5% of the population.
is required that citizens residing longer The Roma constitute a rough estimate
than three months to register with the of 2-5% of the total populations in
authorities of the host member state, other CEEC countries. Extensive
attested by a registration certificate governmental and non-governmental
issued to that effect. Individuals who programs have sought to improve the
have registered should not be expelled lives of the Roma, yet they remain the
by a host member state unless they most socially disadvantaged group in
become an unreasonable burden to the Europe. This disadvantage is illustrated
social security system. If a citizen has by the fact of 80% unemployment
resided in a member state for a among the Roma in the Czech
continuous period of five years without Republic (Younge, 2003).
being subject to expulsion, then In France there are currently
permanent residency should be approximately 400,000 Roma living in
conferred, which is no longer subject established communities in addition to
to any conditions (Directive 2004/38). 12,000 who reside there illegally.
Discrimination is dealt with in During the summer of 2010, France
the Charter of Fundamental Rights of deported approximately 8,000 Roma
the European Union, where member back to their countries of origin
states are directed to not discriminate (mainly Bulgaria or Romania). The
based on sex, race, ethnic or social French authorities provided financial
origin, genetic characteristics, incentives to Roma who cooperated
language, religion or beliefs, political (referred to as “repatriate”). Moreover,
or other opinions, membership of an it was suggested that fingerprints
ethnic minority, property, birth, should be taken in order to prevent
disability, age or sexual orientation those who left from returning, thus
(Directive 2004/38). Discrimination taking advantage of the financial
based on nationality is thus not incentive system. The actions taken by
allowed— Union citizens enjoy equal France have been supported by Italy
treatment with nationals in areas that has been using similar strategies of
covered by EU treaties. Yet restrictions voluntary and assisted repatriation for
on the right of free movement can be years. The Italian Interior Minister
Maroni went as far as to say that “he principles and thus should not be
would like Italy to be able to expel EU tolerated (Washington Post, 2011).
citizens who do not meet minimum
income and housing requirements and Development of Intra-EU
who weight on the host state’s social Deportation Laws
welfare system” (Aljazeera, 2010). All EU member states are
French laws regarding subject to EU law. This means that all
deportation have only recently been member states are subject to certain
amended to be in accordance with EU conditions if they want to deport an EU
law and thus the deportation of the citizen to his/her country of origin.
Roma triggered an on-going discussion There are two possible scenarios
regarding xenophobia and crime in wherein expulsion is justified. First,
relation to deportation. Several EU deportation may occur if an individual
member states have been dealing with has been unable to find a job,
problems concerning the Roma and institution of education, insurance or
Sinti and consequently the question any other form of support, including
arises of how best to deal with such being supported by family members.
problems. The discussion includes, Due to the fact that non-compliance
among other topics, whether the with at least one of these requirements
current EU laws on deportation are will most likely lead to an individual
adequate, what can be done to improve posing a burden on the host country’s
the situation of the Sinti and Roma in social security system, deportation is
both their home countries along with permissible. Second, expulsion is
the countries they migrate to, and if permissible if an individual presents a
xenophobia is rising, how can it best threat to public security, public health
be countered. Should Union policy be or public order. In this case, the
restrictive or liberal? A common policy individual has, however, the right to
is essential to providing just appeal to a court for a reversal of the
circumstances for all EU citizens decision. Furthermore, an individual
(BBC, 2010). subject to expulsion on any of the
Another concern is the far-right aforementioned grounds must be given
Jobbik party in Hungary that has a time period of at least one month to
reasserted and significantly expanded leave the country (Directive 2004/38).
its anti-Roma program and propaganda In addition, however, it is very
in order to regain political support. important to note that no group may be
Especially in rural Hungarian expelled from a country (Protocol 4
communities, the Roma continue to be Article 4 of the European Convention
both feared and discriminated against. on Human Rights). Rules on
The Jobbik party entered the national deportation from a host member state
parliament for the first time in 2010, only apply to individuals. Furthermore,
mainly aided by the Hungarian Guard, the rights of an individual having
a radical uniformed group known for resided in the host member state for at
marches and rallies in rural areas to least 5 years is strengthened through
protect the non-Roma and intimidate the acquisition of permanent residency.
the Roma. The Hungarian courts After a period of ten years, the
officially disbanded the Guard in 2009, individual can only be deported on
but it has still managed to provide exceptional circumstances.
support for the marginally less radical The essential divergence
Jobbik party. Such actions run contrary between French law and EU law
to basic values and fundamental EU related to the banning of groups is that
under French law there is no direct residing illegally on the Italian territory
prohibition regarding the deportation aggravates the offense” (Italian Law
of groups of people. This is, however, Decree No. 92 on “urgent measures”
irrelevant due to that fact that EU law for public security, 2008). Additionally
takes precedence over national law and fingerprinting has now been included
specifically only holds individuals to in the national census. Furthermore, a
be subject to proceedings that lead to law has been passed that allows
deportation. Justifications that are deportation of non-Italian citizens from
isolated from the particulars of the case Italy if they are sentenced to more than
or that rely on considerations of two years of imprisonment.
general prevention are not deemed Clearly, these laws are breaches
acceptable (Art. 27(2) Directive of EU law. The European Convention
2004//38). on Human Rights that all member
It therefore needs to be states have acceded to states:
established whether France’s conduct “everyone is equal before the law”
does in fact pose a breach of EU law, (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the
why EU laws regarding deportation European Union, 2000, Art. 20). In
have yet to be transposed into French 2010, the situation of the Roma in Italy
law, to what extent the deportation of was finally declared a violation of EU
Roma applies to rules prohibiting legislation on social rights, and Italy
expulsion of groups and to extent temporarily stopped fingerprinting the
Roma individuals pose a social or Roma (European Committee of Social
financial burden to society. Rights, 2010). Yet, the reality remains
that discriminatory laws still exist, and
Current Circumstances the issue of the Roma and Sinti in
The Roma and Sinti continue to Europe is far from resolved.
be subject to discrimination and are at
the center of the growing debate
Incentives/Recommendations
regarding deportation. Due to the fact
It seems unlikely that the conduct
that many of them are Romanian
of the French and Italian authorities
passport holders, they have had the
can be justified. In the case of the
right of free movement within all 27
French Roma, according to EU law
EU member states since Romania
each individual would have to be
acceded to the EU in 2007.
assessed separately by the authorities,
Nonetheless, many of them fear
and only if they fail the social or
deportation due to the fact that reality
financial requirements would France
does not always comply with the legal
be allowed to deport them. No French
situation.
policy concerns should be taken into
For example, Italy recently
consideration. As EU citizens, all
adopted a so-called “security package,
Roma individuals can only be expelled
that includes legal and political clauses
if the decision is sent to them “in
that specifically target the Roma.
writing, fully justified and open to
Another problematic new law is one
appeal,” and they should then be given
making it illegal to force children to
one month to leave. The European
beg. Although this law cannot be
Commission also stresses that no
clearly identified as targeting the
“collective expulsions” or ethnic
Roma, it is dealing with a matter
profiling is allowed under EU law,
closely associated with them.
even if the travelers living in
Moreover, a new law states: “the
improvised camps have overstayed the
circumstance of being a subject who is
three months in which they can reside
without registering with the local other EU countries, is
authorities. counterproductive to the values and
Consequently, within the EU, principles of the EU. Yet how can such
more specific measures on how to deal views be silenced without infringing
with the free movement of the Roma upon the freedom of speech, and how
and Sinti people are required. can such views be changed? It is
Furthermore, it is clear that the essential for the functioning of the EU
extreme nationalism portrayed in that member states adhere to Union
Hungary, but also present in many law and present a united front.
TOPIC B: THE SCHENGEN AGREEMENT AND MIGRANTS

The Schengen Agreement United Kingdom to remain outside the
Before the First World War, it Schengen Area.
was possible to travel within Europe As such, the Schengen
without a passport. When the war Agreement is now part of the acquis
ended the practice of issuing passports communautaire, and thus has lost its
and performing routine passport status as treaty. Now amendments must
controls at national borders became the be made according to the legislative
norm. Some exceptions did exist to procedure of the EU. Ratification by
passport controls, for example the signatory states is not required to alter
1952 Nordic Passport Union and the or repeal part of the Schengen-Acquis.
1944 Benelux Agreement. Both of Legal acts that set out the conditions
these regions have largely been for entry into the Schengen Area are
incorporated into the Schengen Area. now enacted by majority vote in EU
Signed on June 14, 1985 the legislative bodies. New members to the
Schengen Agreement was signed by Union do not sign the Schengen
five of the ten member states of the Agreement—they are required to
European Economic Community implement it along with all other pre-
(EEC). The signatories were Belgium, existing EU law.
France, Luxembourg, Holland and The implementation of
West Germany. It was later Schengen rules involves eliminating
supplemented by the 1990 Convention border controls with other Schengen
implementing the Schengen states while strengthening border
Agreement. These two treaties together controls with non-member states. The
created the borderless Schengen Area rules also include provisions for a
within Europe. common policy on the temporary entry
It operates much like a single of persons, the harmonization of
state—there are border controls for external border controls, cross-border
travelers traveling in and out of the police, and judicial cooperation.
area, but there are none internally. The National rules dictate whether a
Schengen Area states share common passport or an EU approved national
rules on visas, and police and judicial identity card is required for identity
cooperation. The Agreement was checks in airports, hotels, or by policy.
initially separate from the European Under special circumstances,
Union, partially due to a lack of regular border controls are used
consensus amongst member states over between Schengen nations. Articles 23
whether the EU had the competence to to 31 of the Schengen Border Code
abolish border controls. The 1997 permits states to reinstate border
Amsterdam Treaty incorporated it into controls for a short period if deemed in
mainstream EU law. the interest of national security, but
By 1997 all EU member states they must follow a consultation
except for the United Kingdom and procedure before such an action. This
Ireland, and two non-member states happened in Portugal during the 2004
(Norway and Iceland) had signed the EUFA Championship and in France for
Schengen Agreement. The Amsterdam the 60-year anniversary of D-Day.
Treaty that integrated the Schengen
Agreement into European Union law Currently the borderless
included opt-outs for Ireland and the Schengen Area consists of 25
European countries, with a population
of more than 400 million people and an Italy’s foreign minister, Franco
area of 4, 31, 099 km2. Frattini, accused France of showing “a
grave lack of solidarity” in refusing to
Migration to Europe since 1985 permit Tunisians to enter French
In the 1990s, a large proportion territory from the border town of
of immigrants to Europe (especially to Ventimiglia.
Spain, Greece, Germany, Italy, These Tunisian migrants
Portugal and the United Kingdom) (~20,000) have been granted six-
came from the former Eastern bloc month residency permits by Italy. The
states. Specific migration patterns are diplomatic spat only deepened when
determined by geography, language France reacted by reinforcing policy
and culture. For example, this can be patrol along their Southeastern border,
seen by the fact that a large number of angrily rejected Italy’s claim that such
Poles have migrated to the UK and permits allow migrant to travel freely
Ireland while Romanians and around Europe. The diplomatic spat
Bulgarians have chosen Italy or Spain. reached its climax when French
In the case of earlier EU authorities blocked cross-border trains
enlargements, most member states coming from Ventimiglia for several
have restricted free movement of hours, leaving hundreds of travelers
nationals of the acceding nation. stranded.
During the 2004, EU enlargement the Few in Italy have bought the
United Kingdom did not do so and French explanation that the train
therefore received many migrants from shutdown was motivated by fears
Poland, Latvia and other new EU regarding “public order”, the ultimate
states. During the 2007 enlargement, legal argument to temporarily suspend
Spain did not restrict movement and the Schengen treaty. Instead, migrant
received many Romanians and jurists insist that the French stance is a
Bulgarians. result of a political strategy rather than
a legal decision. Migration experts
Recent Developments warned France that the legality of its
The Arab Spring that has actions were unclear and reminded
brought a wave of democracy across Paris to tread the fine line between
the Middle East and North Africa has intensifying border checks and
also led to many distraught peoples respecting the European principle of
fleeing their countries as refugees. free movement
February 2011, just a month after The French border controls
protesters brought down Tunisian have come under increased scrutiny by
dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, the pro-migrant activities checking
arrival of more than 5,000 Tunisians whether they comply with European
arrived on the small Italian island of and French laws against ethnic
Lampeduse. This new wave of profiling. A legal expert from the
immigrants threatened to overwhelm French rights group Anafé, Brigitte
the country and Italy called for EU Espuche, stated that the overt targeting
help. of North African migrants could spark
Italy ended up facing a a discrimination lawsuit and jeopardize
diplomatic confrontation with France the French policy of restricting cross-
in March after an estimated 3,500 border movements. “Police forces are
Tunisians who escaped from detention aware that it would be completely
centers grouped at the Franco-Italian illegal. When reports emerged on
border, demanding to be allowed in. February 21 that an internal note
calling for the control of Tunisian intervention would only be provisional
nationals was put up in the Cannes until any other weaknesses were
police station, it was pulled down the corrected. At the moment, the
next day”, says Brigitte Espuche. suspension of the agreement is only
Migration experts are also permitted in the case of “grave threat
questioning whether French plans to to the public order or internal
control all migrants with permits in security”, allowing for border controls
order to deport those who cannot to be reinstated for a maximum of
produce evidence of “sufficient funds” thirty days.
is indeed enforceable once migrants In late April 2011, Sarkozy and
are already in the Schengen Area. Berlusconi met to discuss proposals for
Under European law, it is legal to amendments to the Schengen
monitor the financial means of agreement that would allow members
migrants, but this usually takes place to reinstall border controls in cases
outside the borders of the Schengen such as the current influx of migrants
Area. An internal administrative note from North Africa. They have sent an
from the French Interior Minister official letter with their proposals to
Claude Gueant defined the sufficient senior EU officials including Council
funds to be 62 Euros per day (31 if President Herman van Rompuy and
hosted for free) but it did not elaborate Commission President Jose Manuel
on how police can assess the migrant’s Barroso. An official response from the
prospective length of stay. Union is still pending, but EC
Consequently, a Tunisian migrant with representative Olivier Bailly
an Italian residency permit could diplomatically commented that the
legally enter France with 124 Euros in proposals were either impossible or
his pocket if he claims that he does not already implemented. “The Schengen
intend to stay more than two days. Agreement is part of the European
Refugees continue to flock to Treaties. One must leave the Union to
the Italian island, including a group of terminate the force of Schengen” the
Eritreans, Somalis and Ethiopians who EU representative commented.
had been living and working in Libya. How should France’s actions be
The EU stated that it has already given interpreted? On one hand, its fears are
a lot of help, having made 18 million understandable. Several hundreds of
Euros (25 million dollars) available to thousands of Tunisian immigrants
Italy in 2010-11 for repatriation in already reside in France, many of
addition to the 25 million Euros which are not integrated into society.
already allocated to all member states On the other hand, the influx of
for emergency measures. Italy claims Tunisian migrants is a backlash from
that this is not enough. the colonial and post-colonial policy of
France. From 1881 to 1956 Tunisia
Incentives/ Recommendations was a French colony, with French
In an off-the-record, yet widely becoming one of the native languages.
reported briefing, a senior French In the years after decolonization,
official stated: “the governance of France has allowed citizens to move
Schengen is failing. It seems that there from their former colonies to France,
is a need to reflect on a mechanism that but in many cases, an economic and
will allow a temporary suspension of cultural gap exists.
the Agreement, in case of systematic The question now remains
failure of an external (EU) border.” whether France will be able to amend
The official added that any such the Schengen Agreement. If not, will it
try to withdraw from Schengen? Is this migrants—Germany, Holland and
even possible to do without leaving the Belgium all complained about the
European Union too? How can Italian action. The migrants arrived in
immigrants such as Tunisians be better Europe at a time of economic security.
integrated into French society? France In Italy youth unemployment is at
has been pushing for a Common 25%, and across the EU, 24 million are
European Immigration Policy since without work. The real tension is that
2008—perhaps this is the way to deal EU principles are increasingly at odds
with what is definitely a pan-European with the economic reality and the
issue? France is far from the only wishes of the majority of the people.
country that did not want to take the
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND RECOMMENDED READING

Al Jazeera English - Italy Wants EU SPIEGEL ONLINE -
Action on Roma - Europe. Web. Nachrichten. Spiegel Online, 15
25 May 2011. Feb. 2011. Web. 03 June 2011.
<http://english.aljazeera.net/news <http://www.spiegel.de/internatio
/europe/2010/08/2010821159136 nal/europe/0,1518,745669,00.ht
98771.ht ml>. ml>.

BBC News - EU May Take Legal Directive 2004/38/EC of the European
Action against France over Parliament and of the Council of
Roma. BBC - Homepage. Web. 29 April 2004
16 Apr. 2011. European Council - The Institution."
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/wor European Council. Web. 17 May
ld-europe- 11301307>. BBC 2011.
NEWS Europe - Q&A: EU Law <http://www.european-
on Deportation. Web. 25 May council.europa.eu/the-
2011. institution.aspx?lang=en>.
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/euro
pe/7079709.stm>. "EUROPA - European Council."
EUROPA – The Official Website
"BBC News - France Seeks Change to of the European Union. Web. 25
Schengen Border Agreement." May 2011.
BBC - Homepage. BBC News, <http://europa.eu/about-
22 Apr. 2011. Web. 01 June eu/institutions-bodies/european-
2011. council/index_en.htm>.
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/wor
ld-europe-13171403>. "European Commission - Enlargement
- Accession Criteria -
"Bulgaria: Commission Strikes Back: Enlargement." EUROPA -
Schengen Suspension European Commission -
Impossible." Novinite.com - Sofia Homepage. European Union, 30
News Agency. 26 Apr. 2011. Oct. 2010. Web. 28 May 2011.
Web. 30 May 2011. <http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/
<http://www.novinite.com/view_ enlargement_process/accession_
news.php?id=127675>. process/criteria/index_en.htm>.

Convention for the Protection of "European Council - Home." European
Human Rights and Fundamental Council. European Union. Web.
Freedoms (CETS No.: 005) 25 May 2011.
Council of Europe Roma and <http://www.european-
Travellers Division." Council of council.europa.eu/home-
Europe. Web. 25 May 2011. page.aspx?lang=en>.
<http://www.coe.int/t/dg3/romatr
avellers/archive/default_en.asp>. "European Union - EEAS (European
External Action Service) |
"Destination Lampedusa: European Migration and Asylum in
Leaders Struggle with Wave of External Relations." European
Tunisian Migrants - SPIEGEL Union - EEAS (European
ONLINE - News - International." External Action Service) |
Homepage. European Union. italy>.
Web. 26 May 2011.
<http://www.eeas.europa.eu/migr Squires, Nick. "Refugees Head for
ation/index_en.htm>. Europe from Tunisia and Libya -
Telegraph." Telegraph.co.uk -
Gabel, Matthew J. "European Union Telegraph Online, Daily
(EU) — History.com Articles, Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph
Video, Pictures and Facts." - Telegraph. Telegraph Media
History.com — History Made Group, 30 Mar. 2011. Web. 02
Every Day — American & World June 2011.
History. A&E Television <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new
Networks. Web. 25 May 2011. s/worldnews/europe/italy/841665
<http://www.history.com/topics/e 9/Refugees-head-for-Europe-
uropean-union-eu>. from-Tunisia-and-Libya.html>.

Hewitt, Gavin. "BBC - Gavin Hewitt's "The Schengen Area and Cooperation."
Europe: Europe and EUROPA – The Official Website
Immigration." BBC - Homepage. of the European Union. European
BBC News, 26 Apr. 2011. Web. Union, 9 Mar. 2009. Web. 03
03 June 2011. June 2011.
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ther <http://europa.eu/legislation_sum
eporters/gavinhewitt/2011/04/eur maries/justice_freedom_security/
ope_and_immigration.html>. free_movement_of_persons_asyl
um_immigration/l33020_en.htm
"Home Affairs - Policies - >.
Immigration." EUROPA -
European Commission - The Washington Post - Hungary’s Far-
Homepage. European Union. right Jobbik Party Returns to
Web. 02 June 2011. Anti- Roma Campaign in Effort
<http://ec.europa.eu/home- to Regain Popularity. Web. 26
affairs/policies/immigration/imm May 2011.
igration_intro_en.htm>. <http://www.washingtonpost.co
m/world/hungarys-far-right-
Law Decree (Decreto legge) No jobbik-party- returns-to-anti-
92/2008, on “Urgent measures in roma-campaign-in-effort-to-
the field of public security”, regain-
amended and converted into law popularity/2011/04/03/AFYKSk
by Law No. 125/2008 of 24 July UC_story.html>.
2008 (Gazzetta Ufficiale No.
173, 25 July 2008). Trukhachev, Vadim. "France Questions
Fundamental European
"Migrant Spat Puts Strain on EU Open Principles | EUTimes.net." The
Borders." France 24- European Union Times - World
International News 24/7. France News, Breaking News. The EU
24, 19 Apr. 2011. Web. 02 June Times, 26 Apr. 2011. Web. 01
2011. June 2011.
<http://www.france24.com/en/20 <http://www.eutimes.net/2011/04
110419-tunisia-migrant-train- /france-questions-fundamental-
blockade-comes-under-legal- european-principles/>.
attack-ventimiglia-french-police-
Younge, Gary - The Plight of the Roma
| World News | The Guardian.
Guardian.co.uk. Web. 26 May
2011.
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl
d/2003/jan/08/eu.politics>.