This article critiques the European Court of Human Rights’ approach towards assessing asylum seekers’ right to respect for private and family life under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in the context of their expulsion. In balancing the right of the individual against the public interest, it is argued that the court’s case law follows a static perspective. The rigidly defined assumption that the public interest lies in enforcing migration control and that the societal contributions of asylum seekers cannot influence the strength of the public interest is prevalent in jurisprudence yet underexplored in scholarship. The article uses the case of asylum seekers who contribute to a country’s economy to demonstrate that the court currently fails to appreciate the interdependence between these interests. It then suggests a path by which the court’s approach might be adjusted towards more nuance, ultimately allowing the contributions of asylum seekers to European communities to be appropriately reflected in legal determinations.
Adel-Naim Reyhani, Gloria Golmohammadi (2021). The Limits of Static Interests: Appreciating Asylum Seekers’ Contributions to a Country’s Economy in Article 8 ECHR Adjudication on Expulsion. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REFUGEE LAW, 33(1), 3-27 [10.1093/ijrl/eeab023].
The Limits of Static Interests: Appreciating Asylum Seekers’ Contributions to a Country’s Economy in Article 8 ECHR Adjudication on Expulsion
Adel-Naim Reyhani;
2021
Abstract
This article critiques the European Court of Human Rights’ approach towards assessing asylum seekers’ right to respect for private and family life under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in the context of their expulsion. In balancing the right of the individual against the public interest, it is argued that the court’s case law follows a static perspective. The rigidly defined assumption that the public interest lies in enforcing migration control and that the societal contributions of asylum seekers cannot influence the strength of the public interest is prevalent in jurisprudence yet underexplored in scholarship. The article uses the case of asylum seekers who contribute to a country’s economy to demonstrate that the court currently fails to appreciate the interdependence between these interests. It then suggests a path by which the court’s approach might be adjusted towards more nuance, ultimately allowing the contributions of asylum seekers to European communities to be appropriately reflected in legal determinations.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


