Abstract
The Constitutional Court in Serbia protects the constitutionality and legality of human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the 2006 Constitution. However, its role in asylum- and migration-related matters is limited. There are two reasons for this: the Court very narrowly interprets its own competencies which results in the rejection of the majority of constitutional complaints, and the Court serves as a protector of state authorities rather than a protector of the human rights of asylum seekers, refugees, and migrants. The jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court in this area relates to several matters: the application of a safe third country principle, rights concerning the asylum procedure, and issues relating to the freedom of movement and detention of migrants. Therefore, the Court has been unable to develop clear and coherent practice in this area. However, it is worth noting that the Court invokes relevant standards derived from the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, although the application of those standards usually does not lead to a decision to uphold the constitutional complaint. It also relies on other international sources, such as the UN Refugee Agency reports on specific countries, various United Nations and Council of Europe instruments, and reports of non-governmental organisations. Finally, the Court is not interested in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (EU), despite the fact that Serbian legislation in this area is inspired by the EU acquis. Serbia is not a member state of the EU, but as a candidate country it is in the process of aligning its own legislation and practice, and referral to the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice would provide guidance on how to interpret domestic provisions, such as subsidiary protection.
Published Version
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 call