- 1 Introduction
- 2 Methodology
- 2.1 Objectives of the Study
- 2.2 Outline of the methodology
- 2.3 Work undertaken by the Study Team and challenges encountered
- 3 Background to the Temporary Protection Directive
- 3.1 What preceded the adoption of the Temporary Protection Directive
- 3.1.1 National forms of temporary protection preceding the adoption of the TPD
- 3.1.2 Historical context
- 3.1.3 Commission proposals and negotiations
- 3.2 The temporary protection mechanism
- 3.2.1 Objectives
- 3.2.2 The mechanism
- 3.2.3 Status of transposition
- 3.2.4 Application to date
- 4 Strengths and weaknesses of the TPD
- 4.1 Introduction
- 4.2 A broad definition of mass influx, resulting in flexibility but also obstacles in its application
- 4.2.1 “Large numbers”
- 4.2.2 “Arrival (spontaneous or aided) in the community”
- 4.2.3 Who come from a “specific country or geographical area”
- 4.2.4 Who are “unable to return to their country of origin”
- 4.2.5 If there is a “risk” that the asylum system will be unable to process the influx without “adverse effects”
- 4.3 Cumbersome and lengthy activation procedure influenced by political factors
- 4.3.1 Are the right actors involved?
- 4.3.2 The number of steps are high
- 4.3.3 The content of some of the steps are unclear
- 4.4 Solidarity principle, based on dual volunteerism
- 4.4.1 The principle of solidarity
- 4.4.2 The organisation of redistribution, as laid down in the TPD
- 4.5 A fair and adequate level of protection of rights, but potentially unattractive to Member States
- 4.6 In the absence of activation, theobjective to harmonise TP is undermined
- 5 Pressures on the EU in the period 2001 2014 and reasons for non-implementation
- 5.1 Pressure on Member States in the period 2001-2014
- 5.1.1 Pressure due to a significant high and/or sudden increase
- 5.1.2 Pressure following a gradual increase
- 5.1.3 Pressure due to strong fluctuations
- 5.2 Management of the situation
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011799439