The Dublin Cooperation consists of a set of procedural rules regarding the return of asylum seekers for asylum case processing in other European countries and how this should be implemented. The cooperation includes all EU member states as well as Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, and Liechtenstein. The regulations are based on objective responsibility criteria that identify which country is most responsible for an asylum seeker's entry into Dublin territory.
The Dublin III Regulation, which is the current regulatory framework, is incorporated into Norwegian immigration law and regulations. The regulation applies as Norwegian law, making it an important legal source in Dublin cases.
Main Purpose of the Dublin Cooperation
The Dublin cooperation has several central purposes:
Ensure that every asylum seeker has their asylum case substantively processed in one country, but only in one
Prevent asylum seekers from becoming "ping-pong balls" between different countries ("refugee in orbit" situations)
Prevent "asylum shopping" - asylum seekers applying for asylum in multiple countries
Make the asylum process more efficient through clear responsibility rules
Strengthen asylum seekers' legal protections
To ensure the effectiveness of the cooperation, the Eurodac Regulation has been established, which means that all cooperating countries must register fingerprints of asylum seekers over 14 years old in a common database.
Responsibility Criteria in the Dublin Regulations
The Dublin regulations are based on a hierarchical system of responsibility criteria:
Unaccompanied minor asylum seekers: The best interests of the child shall be fundamental. Where the child has family members in a Dublin country, the child should as a general rule have their case processed there.
Family reunification: Where the asylum seeker has family members with protection in another Dublin country, this country will usually become responsible for the asylum application.
Visa or residence permit: The country that has issued a visa or residence permit becomes responsible for the asylum application.
Irregular border crossing: The country where the asylum seeker first crossed the border illegally becomes responsible.
First country of asylum: If none of the other criteria can be applied, the country where the asylum seeker first arrived becomes responsible - the so-called "first country of asylum rule."
Exceptions to the Dublin Rules
The Dublin regulations contain important exception provisions:
Sovereignty clause (Art. 17 No. 1): Any country can decide that it will take responsibility for processing an asylum application even if the return criteria indicate otherwise.
Humanitarian clause (Art. 17 No. 2): A country can ask another to accept a person for asylum case processing based on cultural and humanitarian considerations.
The exception provisions are rarely used in practice, despite the fact that they provide room to take individual considerations beyond the established responsibility criteria.
Legal Protection and Human Rights
A crucial principle in the Dublin cooperation is that return to another Dublin country must be justifiable in terms of human rights obligations. This has been emphasized through several decisions from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the EU Court of Justice:
M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece (2011): Established that return to Greece was contrary to ECHR Article 3 due to inadequate reception conditions and asylum procedures.
Tarakhel v. Switzerland (2014): Established that the return of families with children to Italy requires specific guarantees of adequate reception conditions.
Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary (2017): Established that return to Hungary involved a risk of chain refoulement back to Greece.
These decisions show that member states have an independent responsibility to assess whether the return country fulfills its obligations under international human rights and the Refugee Convention.
The Dublin Cooperation Under Pressure
Experiences from the refugee crisis in 2015-2016 showed that the Dublin system has significant weaknesses, particularly regarding burden-sharing between countries. Large arrivals to countries like Italy and Greece put the system under pressure, and it became clear that there is a need for a more equitable distribution of responsibility.
The EU Commission presented a proposal for a Dublin IV Regulation in 2016, which includes a redistribution mechanism for situations with large influxes of asylum seekers. However, negotiations have shown that there is significant disagreement between member states on how responsibility should be distributed.
Norwegian Implementation of the Dublin Rules
In Norway, the Dublin rules are implemented through the Immigration Act § 32, which allows for refusing to process asylum applications from persons who can be returned to another Dublin country. The Immigration Regulations § 7-4 specify when exceptions can be made, including due to connections to the realm or for special reasons.
Norwegian practice shows a restrictive approach to the use of exception provisions, in line with political guidelines and instructions.
