Migration Law and the Externalization of Border Controls

Preface List of abbreviations Introduction Part I A case study: the 2017 Italy-Libya Memorandum of Understanding 1 The Italy-Libya Memorandum of Understanding of 2 February 2017 2 Violations of human rights in Libya 3 Italy’s responsibility for complicity 3.1 Article 16 of the International Law Commission Draft Articles on the Responsibility of States (ASR) 3.1.1 The mental element 3.1.2 The requirement of opposability 3.2 Italy’s responsibility for complicity 4 Italy’s responsibility for violation of positive obligations inherent in Article 3 ECHR 4.1 Overlap between complicity and positive obligations 4.2 Italy’s responsibility for violation of positive obligations 4.2.1 Jurisdiction under ECHR 4.2.2 ECHR case law on positive obligations and jurisdiction 5 Closing remarks Part II The 2017 Italy-Libya Memorandum of Understanding as a small part of a broader scenario 1 The Externalization of EU migration policies 1.1 The external dimension of EU migration and asylum policy in the GAMM and in the Agenda on Migration 1.2 The EU-Turkey statement of 18 March 2016 1.2.1 Criticism concerning human rights and refugee law 1.2.2 Criticism concerning European Constitutional law 1.3 From the European Commission communication of 7 June 2016 establishing a new Partnership Framework with third countries to the European Council conclusions of 28 June and 18 October 2018 2 The attitude of the Luxembourg Court vis-à-vis externalization 2.1 The case law concerning the EU-Turkey Statement 2.2 The humanitarian visa judgment of 7 March 2017 3 Closing remarks Conclusions Bibliography Index