Between Sovereignty and International Legal Cosmopolitanism: a comparative investigation into irregular migrant detention in the European Union

Abstract

This thesis conducts a comparative investigation into tensions between multiple levels of norms, between European Union (EU) policy regarding the detention of asylum seekers against the backdrop of international law, and the transposition of those rules into domestic policy and law by EU Member States via supranational regulation in the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). The theoretical basis of the research rests on Jurgen Habermas' conception that greater state authority should be transferred upwards via supranational and international institutions in order to solve difficult cross-border issues. Qualitative analysis and fieldwork gathered primary and secondary material from actors in case study countries France, the Czech Republic, and actors linked to the European Union and international institutions. The results of this original research confirm that an ongoing struggle for power is occurring for actors who wish to influence the CEAS, both among and between actors at the Member State level, the supranational EU level, and the international level. NGOs at all levels are not achieving their desired supranational reach, instead being substantially limited in their influence by national regulatory realities. Equally, supranational and institutional actors at all levels are limited in their aspirations for coherent national implementation of the CEAS by the confines of national regulatory realities that serve to hold powerful influences at bay. The research suggests that NGOs and supranational institutions may need to move via Habermas' civil society learning processes towards a more coherent supranational cross-border model of civil society advocacy to support common rules such as are contained in the CEAS, in order to achieve greater convergence in the development and implementation of common rules at the national level by EU Member States. Show more