Implementation leeway in the Dublin system: evidence from Switzerland

Abstract

ABSTRACT (Non-)implementation of rules is a key issue in the EU literature. During the European 'migration crisis' in 2015/16, several member states openly deviated from the clear rules the legal framework of Schengen and Dublin established. Although these controversies have attracted much attention, member states' authorities can also deviate from European rules in everyday decision making. Little is known about this leeway. For example, the Dublin system allows countries to send asylum seekers in an ‘outgoing procedure’ when they conclude that another Dublin state is responsible for the asylum application. This paper develops the argument that efficiency considerations lead national authorities to specialise in asylum seekers from countries from which they already have many residents. Asylum seekers from these countries are less likely to be sent in an outgoing procedure. The Dublin system does not intend this type of selection based on nationality. Using unique, high-quality register panel data from Switzerland, the statistical analysis of multilevel models shows that an outgoing procedure is indeed more likely for applicants from countries with a comparatively small number of residents. The findings of this analysis have broader implications for the Common European Asylum System.