Latest news with #CourtofJusticeoftheEuropeanUnion
Saudi Gazette
3 days ago
- General
- Saudi Gazette
Migrants with minors not aiding illegal immigration, top EU court rules
LUXEMBOURG — The Court of Justice of the European Union on Tuesday ruled in favor of migrants' rights in a case filed by an Italian court regarding what can be considered aiding and abetting illegal immigration. The court ruling noted that, in the case of a third-country national entering the EU irregularly accompanied by a child in their care, their conduct "cannot be regarded as aiding and abetting illegal immigration." "In fact, the parent in this case assumes an obligation related to his or her personal responsibility towards the child in accordance with fundamental rights, in particular respect for family life and the child," the president of the EU's highest legal authority, Koen Lenaerts, explained in his judgment. With this preliminary ruling, the court agrees with the Court of Bologna, which filed the proceedings in July 2023 following the entry into Italy of a Congolese citizen in 2019. The woman entered the country at the airport border of Bologna with two minors — her daughter and niece, over whom she had actual care following the death of the niece's mother — using false documents. She said she fled Congo after receiving threats from her ex-partner and took the two minors with her because she feared for their physical well-being. She was arrested and is being prosecuted for facilitating unauthorized entry into Italy. The Italian court had asked the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) whether the 2002 directive on the facilitation of illegal immigration was compatible with the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The referring court doubted whether the directive provides for humanitarian assistance as a justification for making the crime of aiding and abetting not punishable. In other words, it was asking the EU court about the scope of the general offence of facilitation of unauthorised entry, provided for by EU law. "The court answers that the conduct of a person who, in breach of the rules governing the movement of people across borders, brings into the territory of a member state minors who are third-country nationals and are accompanying him or her, and over whom he or she exercises actual care, does not fall within the scope of that offence," the ruling on Tuesday said. It added that this conduct "does not constitute facilitation of illegal immigration, which EU law seeks to combat" but rather "the exercise by that person of his or her responsibility stemming from the family relationship and the actual care over those minors." Lenaerts went further, stating that the interpretation is necessary, also in light of the fundamental right to asylum. He explained that, because the woman had made an application for international protection, she could not be regarded as staying illegally on the territory. This is the case so long as no decision has been given on her application at first instance, Lenaerts explained. — Euronews
Time of India
12-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
No EU toast raised with single malta: CJEU verdict spells end for 'Golden Passport' scheme
Freedom to do so must be exercised in compliance with EU laws. The scheme led to 'commercialisation of the grant of nationality of a member state and, by extension, of [EU] citizenship', which breaches EU rules relating to citizenship and the principle of sincere cooperation. Live Events Every person holding the nationality of a member state shall be an EU citizen and enjoy the rights, and be subject to the duties, provided for in the treaty. These rights shall be exercised under conditions and limits defined by the treaties and by measures adopted under them. Assist each other in carrying out tasks flowing from the treaties. Take appropriate measures to ensure fulfilment of obligations arising from the treaties or resulting from acts of EU institutions. Refrain from any measure that would jeopardise attainment of EU objectives. In April, Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) held Malta's investor-citizenship scheme (ICS) - 'golden passports' - to be a contravention of EU laws. This was the only remaining EU member state that still operated a golden passport was adopted under Article 10(9) of the Maltese Citizenship Act, and the Granting of Citizenship for Exceptional Services Regulations 2020, which allowed foreign investors to be naturalised as citizens of Malta upon fulfilment of certain conditions, principally of a financial nature. Such schemes are called ' citizenship by investment ' (CBI). CJEU's impugned order comes days after the EC initiated legal proceedings against Malta after revelations that Maltese passports had allegedly been sold to Russians, who were later sanctioned due to the Russia-Ukraine defended its competence in regulating citizenship matters. While the court recognised this, it also held that:According to Article 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU):Article 9 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) similarly states that every citizen of a member state shall be an EU citizen. Also, Article 4(3) of TEU puts forth the principle of sincere cooperation, under which the EU and member states shall:Notably, CJEU's order contradicts advocate general Anthony Collins' opinion from 2024, in which he remarked that 'holding the scheme to be illegitimate would upset the carefully crafted balance between national and EU citizenship, leading to a wholly unlawful erosion of member states' competence'.CBI was launched after Malta's integration into the EU and its adoption of the euro, which exposed Malta's economy to the 2008 financial crisis and the euro crisis of 2009. After this, Malta first came up with the idea of CBI in the form of the Individual Investor Programme (IIP) in 2013. Under it, an investor (citizenship buyer) was required to make a non-refundable contribution to Malta's National Development and Social Fund.A minimum non-refundable donation of ₹6 lakh was required for a 36-mth naturalisation period, while ₹7.5 lakh could fast-track naturalisation to only a year. IIP was open for applications until September 30, 2020, after which it was replaced by 2020 regulations and the Maltese Citizenship by Naturalisation for Exceptional Services by Direct Investment its success, Malta has continued to promote the scheme. Valletta has now become home to many licensed agencies and legitimate brokers that peddle citizenship of their country (and, by extension, that of the EU). Its concurrent rise in notoriety stems from the fact that by selling its citizenship, Malta is transacting EU citizenship - opening the proverbial door to non-EU nationals to enter the union's political bloc and economic implications have been deep, perverse and expansive. Countries such as Malta are arguably transacting more than just an entitlement or a bundle of rights, leading to unexpected triggers and worries. The issues around national sovereignty, market access, free trade, visa-free travel and global security are just the tip of the it's the issue of absconsion, tax avoidance, shifting wealth or even waging wars, one can witness a systematic and institutional decoupling of the state from its citizenry. This is a proven nightmare for polity and writer is a Delhi-based lawyer.
Economic Times
12-05-2025
- Business
- Economic Times
No EU toast raised with single malta: CJEU verdict spells end for 'Golden Passport' scheme
Freedom to do so must be exercised in compliance with EU laws. The scheme led to 'commercialisation of the grant of nationality of a member state and, by extension, of [EU] citizenship', which breaches EU rules relating to citizenship and the principle of sincere cooperation. Every person holding the nationality of a member state shall be an EU citizen and enjoy the rights, and be subject to the duties, provided for in the treaty. These rights shall be exercised under conditions and limits defined by the treaties and by measures adopted under them. Assist each other in carrying out tasks flowing from the treaties. Take appropriate measures to ensure fulfilment of obligations arising from the treaties or resulting from acts of EU institutions. Refrain from any measure that would jeopardise attainment of EU objectives. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of .) In April, Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) held Malta's investor-citizenship scheme (ICS) - 'golden passports' - to be a contravention of EU laws. This was the only remaining EU member state that still operated a golden passport was adopted under Article 10(9) of the Maltese Citizenship Act, and the Granting of Citizenship for Exceptional Services Regulations 2020, which allowed foreign investors to be naturalised as citizens of Malta upon fulfilment of certain conditions, principally of a financial nature. Such schemes are called ' citizenship by investment ' (CBI). CJEU's impugned order comes days after the EC initiated legal proceedings against Malta after revelations that Maltese passports had allegedly been sold to Russians, who were later sanctioned due to the Russia-Ukraine defended its competence in regulating citizenship matters. While the court recognised this, it also held that:According to Article 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU):Article 9 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) similarly states that every citizen of a member state shall be an EU citizen. Also, Article 4(3) of TEU puts forth the principle of sincere cooperation, under which the EU and member states shall:Notably, CJEU's order contradicts advocate general Anthony Collins' opinion from 2024, in which he remarked that 'holding the scheme to be illegitimate would upset the carefully crafted balance between national and EU citizenship, leading to a wholly unlawful erosion of member states' competence'.CBI was launched after Malta's integration into the EU and its adoption of the euro, which exposed Malta's economy to the 2008 financial crisis and the euro crisis of 2009. After this, Malta first came up with the idea of CBI in the form of the Individual Investor Programme (IIP) in 2013. Under it, an investor (citizenship buyer) was required to make a non-refundable contribution to Malta's National Development and Social Fund.A minimum non-refundable donation of ₹6 lakh was required for a 36-mth naturalisation period, while ₹7.5 lakh could fast-track naturalisation to only a year. IIP was open for applications until September 30, 2020, after which it was replaced by 2020 regulations and the Maltese Citizenship by Naturalisation for Exceptional Services by Direct Investment its success, Malta has continued to promote the scheme. Valletta has now become home to many licensed agencies and legitimate brokers that peddle citizenship of their country (and, by extension, that of the EU). Its concurrent rise in notoriety stems from the fact that by selling its citizenship, Malta is transacting EU citizenship - opening the proverbial door to non-EU nationals to enter the union's political bloc and economic implications have been deep, perverse and expansive. Countries such as Malta are arguably transacting more than just an entitlement or a bundle of rights, leading to unexpected triggers and worries. The issues around national sovereignty, market access, free trade, visa-free travel and global security are just the tip of the it's the issue of absconsion, tax avoidance, shifting wealth or even waging wars, one can witness a systematic and institutional decoupling of the state from its citizenry. This is a proven nightmare for polity and writer is a Delhi-based lawyer.
Local France
17-04-2025
- Politics
- Local France
Can a French police officer search your mobile phone?
On Sunday, in an interview on the French TV network LCI, France's interior minister, Bruno Retailleau, discussed his desire to make it possible to search phones of suspected of staying in France illegally. "I want there to be the possibility of searching phones, because phones are what allow us to see where the foreigner staying illegally comes from,' he said on LCI. What are the rules about French police looking through phones? Currently, there are limits on police powers to confiscate and search anyone's mobile phone. Legal expert Alexis Baudelin told BFMTV that, 'searching a mobile phone during a criminal investigation is equivalent to a search of a home'. An individual stopped by police must first agree to their phone being examined, or a judge must authorise examination of digital data on the phone before a search can be carried out. The only exception to this rule is if a person is stopped in the act of committing an offence – in which case a digital search of a mobile phone in their possession is authorised without prior consent. Advertisement In such instances, it would be an offence for the individual to refuse to provide an access code if it is required to examine the phone. READ ALSO What to do if you are arrested in France However, the Court of Justice of the European Union established that the judicial authority must prove that it is acting in the 'public interest' when carrying out such a search by proving 'the link between the owner of the mobile phone and the criminal offence,' but also by demonstrating the need to access data on the device for the investigation. The data that may give rise to the search of a smartphone includes location, photographs or videos, browsing history, but also the content of communications, including stored messages. However, police must not access 'personal' data relating, in particular, to racial or ethnic origin, or political and religious opinions. Under Retailleau's proposal, such searches would make it possible to find out 'where nationals ( ressortissants ), illegal immigrants or foreigners staying illegally come from,' by examining messages sent by smugglers in France and abroad. READ ALSO EXPLAINED: What are your legal rights as a foreigner in France? While each country is free to impose its own limits, the Court of Justice of the European Union nevertheless specifies that national authorities must respect 'the principle of proportionality,' hence the need for oversight by an independent court. You may also be asked to turn on your mobile phone or computer at a border checkpoint, or by security officials at an airport. The "code français des douanes" also allows for customs officers to ' inspect goods and means of transport and persons ', which has long been interpreted as including mobile phones and laptop computers.
