Holdings Information

Bibliographic Record Display

• Title:Frontex and human rights : responsibility in 'multi-actor situations' under the ECHR and EU public liability law / Melanie Fink (Postdoctoral Researcher at the Europa Institute, Leiden University).
  
•    
• Author/Creator:Fink, Melanie (Researcher), author.
  
• Published/Created:Oxford, United Kingdom ; New York, NY : Oxford University Press, 2018.
  ©2018
  

• Holdings

  Holdings Record Display

  • Location:LAW LIBRARY (level 3)Where is this?
    
  • Call Number: KJE5132 .F56 2018
    
  • Number of Items:1
    
  • Status:Available
    

   
• Library of Congress Subjects:European Border and Coast Guard Agency.
  European Union.
  Human rights--European Union countries.
  
• Edition:First Edition.
  
• Description:xxix, 374 pages : illustrations ; 24 cm
  
• Series:Oxford studies in European law.
  
• Summary:"This book analyses the allocation of responsibility for human rights violations that occur in the context of border control or return operations coordinated by Frontex. The analysis is conducted in three parts. The first part examines the detailed roles and powers of Frontex and the states involved during joint operations, focussing on the decision-making processes and chains of command. The second and third parts develop general rules that govern the allocation of responsibility under public international law, ECHR law, and EU non-contractual liability law in order to apply them to Frontex operations. To illustrate the practical implications of the findings, the study uses four hypothetical scenarios that are based on situations that have in the past given rise to human rights concerns. The book concludes that whilst responsibility for most human rights violations lies with the host state of an operation, it often shares this responsibility with participating states who contribute large assets as well as Frontex. However, the book also exposes how difficult it is for individuals to find a place for bringing complaints against violations of their human rights suffered at the EU's external borders. This casts doubts on whether the current legal framework offers them an effective remedy"-- Provided by publisher.
  
• Notes:Includes bibliographical references (pages 351-367) and index.
  
• ISBN:9780198835455 (hbk.)
  0198835450 (hbk.)
  
• Contents:Machine generated contents note: 1.1. Setting the Scene: Frontex, Multi-Actor Situations, and Responsibility
  1.2. Research Question and Scope
  1.2.1. Main research question
  1.2.2. Scope of the research
  1.2.2.1. operations and actors
  1.2.2.2. legal framework
  1.2.3. research question in detail
  1.3. Research Design
  1.3.1. General approach
  1.3.2. Attribution and causation
  1.3.3. Bases for responsibility: primary and associated responsibility
  1.4. Scientific Relevance
  1.5. Outline of the Study
  2.1. Frontex: An Overview
  2.1.1. Origin, establishment, and tasks
  2.1.1.1. 'Schengen area' common rules governing external border control
  2.1.1.2. Operational implementation of the common rules
  2.1.1.3. Establishment and development of Frontex
  2.1.1.4. Tasks of Frontex
  2.1.2. Legal personality
  2.1.3. Internal organisation
  2.1.3.1. Governing bodies
  2.1.3.2. Staff
  2.1.3.3. Fundamental rights bodies
  2.2. Joint Operations
  2.2.1. Joint border control operations
  2.2.1.1. Activities during operations
  2.2.1.2. Types of operation
  2.2.1.3. Examples of joint border control operations implemented by Frontex
  2.2.2. Joint return operations
  2.2.3. Joint operations hosted by third states
  2.3. Operational Resources for Joint Operations
  2.3.1. Financial resources
  2.3.2. Pooling of human and technical resources
  2.3.2.1. Human resources
  2.3.2.2. Technical resources
  2.3.2.3. Availability of pooled resources
  2.3.3. Deployment of human and technical resources
  2.3.3.1. Deployment of human resources
  2.3.3.2. Deployment of technical resources
  2.3.3.3. Operational Resources Management System (OPERA)
  2.3.3.4. Overview: personnel deployed during operations
  2.4. Implementing Joint Operations
  2.4.1. Applicable rules during joint operations
  2.4.1.1. Generally applicable rules
  2.4.1.2. Operation-specific rules: the Operational Plan
  2.4.1.3. Human rights
  2.4.2. Coordination structures during joint operations
  2.4.2.1. Coordination structures located in the host state
  2.4.2.2. Coordination instruments provided by Frontex
  2.4.3. Authority over deployed resources
  2.4.3.1. Command and control arrangements
  2.4.3.2. Disciplinary authority, criminal jurisdiction, and civil liability
  2.4.4. Responding to fundamental rights-related incidents
  2.4.4.1. General rules on incident reporting
  2.4.4.2. Dealing with fundamental rights-related incidents
  2.4.4.3. Suspension, termination, or withdrawal of financial support
  2.5. Conclusion
  3.1. Responsibility of EU Member States for Breaches of the ECHR
  3.1.1. Responsibility for breaches of the ECHR
  3.1.1.1. Conditions for responsibility under the law of international responsibility
  3.1.1.2. Sources of the law of international responsibility
  3.1.1.3. law of international responsibility and the ECHR
  3.1.2. Responsibility for conduct relating to EU law
  3.1.2.1. Responsibility for conduct of the EU
  3.1.2.2. Responsibility for conduct of EU member states
  3.1.2.3. Responsibility for conduct during Frontex operations
  3.2. Attribution of Conduct: Identifying the Relevant Rules
  3.2.1. rules on attribution of conduct
  3.2.1.1. Attribution of conduct to states
  3.2.1.2. Attribution of conduct to international organisations
  3.2.1.3. Illustration
  3.2.1.4. Possibilities of attribution to multiple entities
  3.2.2. special rule for Frontex operations?
  3.2.2.1. special rule for the European Union?
  3.2.2.2. Responsibility allocation arrangements in the EBCG Regulation
  3.3. Responsibility for the Primary Breach
  3.3.1. Attribution of conduct during Frontex operations: the starting point
  3.3.2. Attribution of conduct to the host state
  3.3.2.1. Article 6 ASR
  3.3.2.2. Article 6 ASR in the case law of the ECtHR
  3.3.2.3. Article 6 ASR in the context of Frontex operations
  3.3.3. Attribution of conduct to the EU
  3.3.3.1. Article 7 ARIO
  3.3.3.2. Article 7 ARIO in the case law of the ECtHR
  3.3.3.3. Article 7 ARIO in the context of Frontex operations
  3.3.4. Interim conclusion
  3.4. Responsibility for Associated Conduct
  3.4.1. Responsibility for violations of obligations to protect
  3.4.1.1. Positive obligations under the ECHR an overview
  3.4.1.2. Protecting individuals from interference by third parties
  3.4.1.3. Responsibility for failures to protect during Frontex operations
  3.4.2. Responsibility for rendering aid or assistance
  3.4.2.1. Derivative responsibility under international law
  3.4.2.2. Responsibility for rendering aid or assistance
  3.4.2.3. Aid or assistance in the context of Frontex operations
  3.4.3. Interim conclusion
  3.5. Conclusion
  4.1. Introduction to EU Public Liability Law
  4.1.1. What is public liability?
  4.1.2. Liability of the European Union and Union bodies
  4.1.2.1. Legal basis
  4.1.2.2. Judicial competence and admissibility
  4.1.2.3. Conditions for liability of the European Union
  4.1.3. Liability of EU Member States
  4.1.3.1. Legal basis
  4.1.3.2. Judicial competence and admissibility
  4.1.3.3. Conditions for liability of EU member states
  4.1.4. Analysing public liability law
  4.1.4.1. Union and member state liability as a single system of public liability
  4.1.4.2. Case law in the area of public liability
  4.2. Liability for Fundamental Rights Violations
  4.2.1. Unlawfulness: the character of the rule infringed
  4.2.1.1. Individual rights, direct effect, and public liability
  4.2.1.2. Individual rights in public liability law
  4.2.1.3. Fundamental rights as sources of 'individual rights'
  4.2.2. Unlawfulness: the nature of the breach
  4.2.2.1. Discretion and its limits
  4.2.2.2. obviousness and reprehensibility of the breach
  4.2.2.3. interplay between the factors determining seriousness
  4.2.2.4. Interim conclusion: the 'reasonable unlawful interpretation'
  4.2.2.5. seriousness of fundamental rights violations
  4.2.3. Damage and causal link
  4.2.3.1. Damage
  4.2.3.2. Causation
  4.3. Liability for the Primary Breach
  4.3.1. How to approach questions of allocation of liability
  4.3.1.1. Attribution, causation, and allocation of liability in EU law
  4.3.1.2. approach of the CJEU
  4.3.1.3. approach adopted for the purposes of this study
  4.3.2. Towards a categorisation of multi-actor situations in EU law
  4.3.2.1. starting point
  4.3.2.2. tentative categorisation of multi-actor situations in EU law
  4.3.3. Independent application of Union legislation by member states
  4.3.3.1. Liability of the Union for unlawful Union legislation
  4.3.3.2. No liability of member states for application of unlawful Union legislation
  4.3.3.3. Liability of member states for unlawful application of Union legislation
  4.3.4. Cooperative application of Union law
  4.3.4.1. Non-binding advice, recommendations, and opinions
  4.3.4.2. Legally binding instructions
  4.3.4.3. pivotal role of the legal room for manoeuvre
  4.3.5. Finding the competent court
  4.3.5.1. starting point: procedure follows substance
  4.3.5.2. Exhaustion of local remedies
  4.3.6. Interim findings: identifying the rules on allocation of liability
  4.3.6.1. Allocation of liability between the Union and its member states
  4.3.6.2. Allocation of liability between member states
  4.3.6.3. Possibilities of joint or concurrent liability
  4.3.6.4. Overview
  4.3.7. Allocation of liability during Frontex operations
  4.3.7.1. Frontex: normative control over conduct during joint operations?
  4.3.7.2. Member states: normative control over conduct during joint operations?
  4.3.8. Interim conclusion
  4.4. Liability for Associated Conduct
  4.4.1. Associated obligations under EU law
  4.4.1.1. Obligations to supervise
  4.4.1.2. Obligations to protect
  4.4.2. Conditions for liability for associated conduct
  4.4.2.1. Conferring rights on individuals
  4.4.2.2. Sufficiently serious breach
  4.4.2.3. Causal link
  4.4.3. Joint or concurrent liability
  4.4.3.1. Court competence
  4.4.3.2. impact of parallel proceedings
  4.4.4. Liability for associated conduct in the context of joint operations
  4.4.4.1. Associated liability of Frontex
  4.4.4.2. Associated liability of participating states
  4.4.4.3. Associated liability of the host state
  4.4.5. Interim conclusion
  4.5. Conclusion
  5.1. Joint Operations and Legal Responsibility under the ECHR and EU Public Liability Law
  5.1.1. Joint operations, deployed resources, and transfer of authority
  5.1.2. Preconditions for legal responsibility under ECHR and EU law
  5.2. Allocation of Responsibility in Multi-Actor Situations: The General Rules
  5.2.1. Allocation of primary responsibility under ECHR and EU law
  5.2.2. Allocation of associated responsibility under ECHR and EU law
  5.3. Allocation of Responsibility in Multi-Actor Situations: The Case of Frontex
  5.3.1. Primary responsibility of host states, participating states, and Frontex
  5.3.2. Associated responsibility of host states, participating states, and Frontex
  5.3.3. Summary of findings
  5.3.4. Responsibility in Examples 1-4
  5.4. Way Forward: Obstacles and Recommendations
  5.4.1. Determining responsibility
  5.4.1.1. authority regime
  5.4.1.2. EU public liability law
  5.4.2. Incurring responsibility
  Contents note continued: 5.4.2.1. General aspects
  5.4.2.2. Addressing multi-actor situations
  5.4.3. Implementing responsibility
  5.5. Epilogue.