Abstract
Abstract This contribution demonstrates that the CJEU cases Ruiz Zambrano and Chavez-Vilchez are particularly significant from a children’s rights perspective. The article connects these two judgments and their implementation in the national Dutch context, with three commonplace themes from children’s rights literature; (1) the child as an equal bearer of rights, (2) the child as a distinct bearer of rights, and (3) the important role of developmental research. This perspective shows that the approach adopted by the CJEU with regard to the EU citizen child is paradigm shifting, as it breaks with dominant approaches in fundamental rights law and immigration law which historically place parental rights front and centre. The contribution demonstrates that the importance of this shift cannot be underestimated, because it provides the contested notions of children’s rights and the Convention on the Right of the Child (CRC) with both legitimacy and meaning.
Highlights
When the CJEU handed down its Ruiz Zambrano judgment, much discussion arose as to the exact meaning of this ruling.[1]
PhD Researcher, Centre for Migration Law, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands E.Nissen@jur.ru.nl. This contribution demonstrates that the CJEU cases Ruiz Zambrano and Chavez-Vilchez are significant from a children’s rights perspective
The article connects these two judgments and their implementation in the national Dutch context, with three commonplace themes from children’s rights literature; (1) the child as an equal bearer of rights, (2) the child as a distinct bearer of rights, and (3) the important role of developmental research. This perspective shows that the approach adopted by the CJEU with regard to the EU citizen child is paradigm shifting, as it breaks with dominant approaches in fundamental rights law and immigration law which historically place parental rights front and centre
Summary
When the CJEU handed down its Ruiz Zambrano judgment, much discussion arose as to the exact meaning of this ruling.[1] The subsequent Dereci judgment quashed a significant part of the promise that Ruiz Zambrano had shown, with regard to the legal position of children.[2] In response, scholars criticized the CJEU for not grounding the assessment of whether a child is forced to leave the territory of the Union in a (children’s) rights approach.[3] Six years after the Dereci judgment, the CJEU changed its course and merged the ‘substance of rights’ test with the normative framework of article 24 of the Charter in the case Chavez-Vilchez, therewith giving substantial meaning to children’s EU citizenship status.[4] This article zooms in on the landmark decisions Ruiz Zambrano and Chavez-Vilchez from a children’s rights perspective.[5] It submits that such a perspective is helpful in understanding the conceptual underpinnings of these judgments and their broader significance. Part three discusses the meaning of the child-specific factors listed in Chavez-Vilchez that must be taken into account and the possible role for developmental research in this regard
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
