Temporary Protection and Continuation of Remote Work for the Country of Origin
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37886/ip.2024.009Keywords:
EU asylum law, mass arrivals of displaced persons, temporary protection, refugees, work for public authorities, European UnionAbstract
Research Question (RQ): Refugee status is denied to persons who cooperate with authorities of a country of origin. However, it is unclear whether this rule also applies to displaced persons, or whether Directive 2011/95/EU regulating subsidiary protection should be applied in their cases.
Purpose: This research focuses on a legal situation of displaced persons who benefit from Directive 2001/55/EC regulating the EU temporary protection mechanism. This law can be activated in case of mass arrivals of persons in need of international protection. The research examines whether displaced persons can continue working for the authorities of their country of origin.
Method: Dogmatic-legal analysis was used. Critical analysis of the law (1951 UN Refugee Convention, and EU law) was made. Historical method was used to support an interpretation of the text of that Convention with that treaty aims. Thanks to this, it was possible to deduce intentions of the drafters and first interpreters of the 1951 Refugee Convention from Travaux préparatoires and subsequent conclusions of the EXCOMM.
Results: The 1951 Refugee Convention applies to persons who are unwilling or unable to be protected by their country of origin. However, incidental contacts with that state do not deprive these persons of protection. Directive 2001/55/EC does not contain an explicit reference to a need to terminate all contacts with a country of origin. Still, some relationships may contradict with the UN values. The asylum caseworker should be able to verify if these activities do not violate refugee law. Hence, the answer to the research questions depends on the scope of activities performed by a displaced person.
Organization/Society: The answer to the research question would help to determine whether providing work for the authorities of a country of origin is always an obstacle to benefiting from temporary protection. Therefore, it can have an impact on the practice of public administration bodies regarding their approach to providing international protection.
Originality: 28% of displaced persons in Poland work remotely in Ukraine. This innovative factor has not been noted in the context of other military conflicts, but the popularization of remote work increases the likelihood that persons seeking protection would not break their ties with a country of origin. Although an issue of a need to terminate relationship with that country has already been researched in literature, there are significant differences between the 1951 Refugee Convention and Directive 2001/55/EC. These differences have not yet been analyzed.
Limitations / further research: A comparative analysis of the EU Member States’ national legislations could help to determine whether there are prospects for amending EU legislation to make it clear if work performed for authorities of a country of origin in the country where the contract is concluded can be used to deny and revoke temporary protection or to limit social assistance in case of persons who perform such work.
References
Bal, Y., Bulgur, N.E., Remote Work: A Paradigm Shift in the Modern Workplace and Its Impact on the Workforce. A.M. Even, B. Christiansen (Eds.), Advances in Human Resources Management and Organizational Development, IGI Global, 374-391, https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-9172-0.ch019
Boccardi, I. (2002). Europe and refugees: towards an EU asylum policy. The Hague & New York: Kluwer Law International. ISBN: 978-90-411-1709-0.
Buffer. (2023). State Of Remote Work 2023. https://buffer.com/state-of-remote-work/2023 (Retrieved 23 April 2024).
Carrera, S., & Ineli-Ciger, M. (Eds.). (2023). EU responses to the large-scale refugee displacement from Ukraine: An analysis on the temporary protection directive and its implications for the future EU asylum policy. European University Institute.
CJEU. (2024). WS v Intervyuirasht organ na Darzhavna agentsia za bezhantsite pri Ministerskia savet. ECLI:EU:C:2023:314.
Costello, C., Foster, M. & McAdam, J. (2021). The Oxford Handbook of International Refugee Law. Oxford: Auflage Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780198848639.001.0001
ECtHR. (1979). Airey v Ireland. Application No. 6289/73 (ECtHR October 9, 1979).
ECtHR. (1989). Soering v. the United Kingdom. Application No. 14038/88 (ECtHR July 7, 1989).
European Union. (2001). Directive 2001/55/EC of the Council of 20 July 2001 on minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of displaced persons and on measures promoting a balance of efforts between Member States in receiving such persons and bearing the consequences thereof.
European Union. (2007). Treaty of Lisbon.
European Union. (2011). Directive 2011/95 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted (recast).
European Union. (2013). Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast).
European Union. (2022). Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/382 of 4 March 2022 establishing the existence of a mass influx of displaced persons from Ukraine within the meaning of Article 5 of Directive 2001/55/EC, and having the effect of introducing temporary protection.
European Union Agency for Asylum, International Organization for Migration, & Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2022). Forced displacement from and within Ukraine: profiles, experiences, and aspirations of affected populations. Luxembourg: Publications Office. https://doi.org/10.2847/739455
Eurostat (2024a). Number of people under temporary protection at 4.3 million. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/ddn-20240308-3 (Retrieved 23 April 2024).
Eurostat (2024b). Asylum applications - annual statistics. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Asylum_applications_-_annual_statistics (Retrieved 23 April 2024).
EXCOMM. (1981). Conclusion No. 22. Protection of Asylum-Seekers in Situations of Large-Scale Influx.
Gersdorf, M. (2019). Nowe trendy gospodarcze a reguła domniemania zawarcia umowy o pracę. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Iuridica, 88, 35–41. https://doi.org/10.18778/0208-6069.88.04
Hurwitz, A. G. (2009). The collective responsibility of states to protect refugees. Oxford-New York: Oxford University Press.
Ineli-Ciger, M. (2016a). A Temporary Protection Regime in Line with International Law: Utopia or Real Possibility? International Community Law Review, 18(3–4), 278–316. https://doi.org/10.1163/18719732-12341332
Ineli-Ciger, M. (2016b). Time to Activate the Temporary Protection Directive. European Journal of Migration and Law, 18(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12342088
Karska, E., and Dąbrowski, Ł.D. (2024). Qualifying for international and national protection under the Polish legal order: Some remarks in the context of the war in Ukraine [version 1; awaiting peer review]. Stosunki Międzynarodowe – International Relations, https://doi.org/10.12688/stomiedintrelat.17794.1
Kerber, K. (2002). The Temporary Protection Directive. European Journal of Migration and Law, 4(2), 193–214. https://doi.org/10.1163/157181602400287350
Kőhalmi, B., and Nagy-Nádasdi, A. (2020). Asylum-seekers as Potential Terrorists (?). In J. C. Simeon (Ed.), Terrorism and Asylum (pp. 275–310). Brill/Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004295995_011
Koo, J. (2018). Mass Influxes and Protection in Europe: A Reflection on a Temporary Episode of an Enduring Problem. European Journal of Migration and Law, 20(2), 157–181. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340027
Kosiel-Pająk, M., & Sadowski, P. (2023). British and Polish Temporary Protection Schemes Addressing Displaced Persons from Ukraine. Journal of Jurisprudence and Legal Practice, 31(4), 887–912. https://doi.org/10.5817/cpvp2023-4-5
Küçük, E. (2023). Temporary Protection Directive: Testing New Frontiers? European Journal of Migration and Law, 25(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718166-12340142
Leboeuf, L. (2022). The Quest for Equilibrium Between Security and Humanitarian Considerations in a Fast-Evolving Legal Environment: The Case of Belgium. M.-C. Foblets & J.-Y. Carlier (Eds.), Law and migration in a changing world (pp. 181–207). Cham: Springer.
Łysienia, M. (2023). Following the EU Response to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine? The Implementation of the Temporary Protection Directive in Poland. Central and Eastern European Migration Review, 12(1), 180–200. https://doi.org/10.54667/ceemr.2023.14
Przybysławska, K. (2009). Niepożądani uchodźcy: Granice ochrony i zasady wykluczenia w świetle prawa międzynarodowego. [Unwanted refugees: Limits of protection and principles of exclusion under international law.]. Warszawa: UNHCR.
Sadowski, P. (2021). The EU’s approach to the extraterritorial processing of asylum claims and its compliance with international law. Revista General De Derecho Europeo, 53, 28–78.
Sadowski, P. (2022). Czy zakres podmiotowy prawa polskiego jest zgodny z Decyzją wykonawczą Rady (UE) 2022/382 w sprawie masowego napływu wysiedleńców z Ukrainy? [Is the subjective scope of Polish law consistent with Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/382 on the mass influx of displaced persons from Ukraine?]. Studia Iuridica, 94, 338–477. https://doi.org/10.31338/2544-3135.si.2022-94.20
Sadowski, P. (2023). Sytuacja prawna na granicy polsko-białoruskiej po wybuchu wojny rosyjsko-ukraińskiej – wyzwanie dla procedur udzielania ochrony międzynarodowej [Legal situation on the Polish-Belarusian border after the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian war - A challenge for procedures on granting international protection]. Studia Politologiczne, 68, 105–118. https://doi.org/10.33896/SPolit.2023.68.6
Sadowski, P. (2024). Limiting Social Assistance under the EU Temporary Protection Directive to Displaced Persons Working Remotely for the Public Administration of Their Country of Origin, Review of European and Comparative Law, 56(1), 119–140. https://doi.org/10.31743/recl.16982
Strzępek, K. (2020). Zakres ochrony Artykułu 8 Europejskiej Konwencji o Ochronie Praw Człowieka i Podstawowych Wolności – uwagi ogólne na tle orzecznictwa Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka. [The Scope of Protection of Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms – General Remarks in the Light of the Case Law of the European Court of Human Right]. Prawo i Więź, 33, 278-294, https://doi.org/10.36128/priw.vi32.68
United Nations. (1969). Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties.
United Nations. (1950). United Nations General Assembly resolution 429(V) of 14 December 1950.
United Nations. (1967). United Nations General Assembly resolution 2198(XXI) of 16 December 1967.
UNHCR. (1979). Handbook and Guidelines on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.
Widerski, P. (2024). The Legal Framework for Assisting Displaced Persons from Ukraine in Meeting Their Housing Needs in Poland Introduced by the Act of March 12, 2022 on Assistance to Citizens of Ukraine in Connection with the Armed Conflict in the Territory of That State. Juridical Tribune - Review of Comparative and International Law, 14(1), 60-82. https://doi.org/10.62768/TBJ/2024/14/1/04
Additional Files
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Piotr Sadowski
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
