The Council of the European Union (EU) recently reached a negotiating position ('mandate') on two significant elements of the 'reform' of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). The vision hailed as a 'historic' agreement by national governments is a direct threat to the right to asylum. The Council not only maintains all structural flaws of the CEAS intact but proposes a quagmire of asylum procedures marred by unworkable, unnecessarily complex rules, that are in clear violation of key human rights standards.
Abstract Special procedural guarantees for vulnerable asylum seekers are a core part of refugee status determination standards. These safeguards are neither afforded, nor properly adjudicated in Greek asylum procedures, however. Drawing on recent case law, this article argues that Greek appeal bodies (the Appeals Committees) routinely rule that vulnerability is irrelevant to refugee status determination or that no procedural harm is sustained from the inappropriate channelling of vulnerable people into truncated procedures, in dereliction of European Union (EU) standards and domestic jurisprudence. Systemic non-compliance with the duty to grant special procedural safeguards is a policy choice, yet the European Commission, the institution responsible for EU law enforcement, refrains from enforcing these standards in Greece. The Commission's enforcement deficit vis-à-vis the Greek asylum system is underpinned by its Task Force for Migration Management's prioritization of ending overcrowding and speeding up decision making over procedural standards, as well as an uneasy balancing act between operational support and monitoring.
