Apr 7, 2025
The Dublin Cooperation: Rules, Responsibility Criteria, and Human Rights Boundaries
The Dublin cooperation consists of a set of procedural rules regarding the return of asylum seekers for asylum 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 entering the Dublin area.
The Dublin III Regulation, which is the current legislation, is integrated into Norwegian law through the Immigration Act and regulations. The regulation functions as Norwegian law, making it an important legal source in Dublin cases.
Main Objectives of the Dublin Cooperation
The Dublin cooperation has several central objectives:
Ensure that every asylum seeker has their asylum case processed in one country, but only one
Prevent asylum seekers from being "bounced around" between different countries ("refugee in orbit" situations)
Prevent "asylum shopping" - asylum seekers applying for asylum in multiple countries
Streamline the asylum process through clear responsibility rules
Enhance the legal protection for asylum seekers
To ensure the effectiveness of the cooperation, the Eurodac Regulation has been established, which requires all participating countries to 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 should be a fundamental consideration. Where the child has family members in a Dublin country, the case should generally be handled there.
Family reunification: Where the asylum seeker has family members with protection in another Dublin country, that country will typically be responsible for the asylum application.
Visa or residence permit: The country that issued the visa or residence permit becomes responsible for the asylum application.
Irregular border crossing: The country where the asylum seeker first illegally crossed the border becomes responsible.
First asylum country: If none of the other criteria can be applied, the country the asylum seeker first arrived in becomes responsible - the so-called "first asylum country rule."
Exceptions to the Dublin Rules
The Dublin regulations contain important exceptions:
Sovereignty clause (art. 17 no. 1): Any country can decide to take responsibility for processing an asylum application, even if the return criteria suggest otherwise.
Humanitarian clause (art. 17 no. 2): A country can request another to take in a person for asylum processing based on cultural and humanitarian considerations.
In practice, the exceptions are rarely used, despite offering the possibility to consider individual circumstances beyond the established responsibility criteria.
Legal Security and Human Rights
A crucial principle in the Dublin cooperation is that return to another Dublin country must be justifiable based on human rights obligations. This has been emphasized through several decisions from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the EU Court of Justice:
M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece (2011): Established that return to Greece was in violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights 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 posed a risk of chain-refoulement back to Greece.
These decisions show that member countries have an independent responsibility to assess whether the return country fulfills its obligations under international human rights and refugee conventions.
Dublin Cooperation Under Pressure
The experiences from the refugee crisis of 2015-2016 showed that the Dublin system has significant weaknesses, particularly regarding burden-sharing among countries. Large arrivals to countries like Italy and Greece put the system under pressure and made it clear that there is a need for a fairer distribution of responsibility.
The EU Commission proposed a Dublin IV Regulation in 2016, which includes a redistribution mechanism for situations with a large influx of asylum seekers. However, negotiations have shown significant disagreement among member states on how the responsibility should be distributed.
Norwegian Implementation of the Dublin Rules
In Norway, the Dublin rules are implemented through the Immigration Act § 32, which provides for the refusal to process asylum applications from individuals who can be returned to another Dublin country. The Immigration Regulations § 7-4 specify when exceptions can be made, including due to connection to the realm or for special reasons.
Norwegian practice shows a restrictive approach to the use of exception provisions, in line with political directives and instructions.
