In Search of the Legal Boundaries of an “Open Society”. The Case of Immigrant Integration in the EU

F eedom, Secu i y & Jus ice:
Eu opean Legal S udies
Ri is a giu idica di classe A
2022, n. 2
DIRETTORE
Angela Di S asi
O dina io di Di i o In e nazionale e di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di Sale no
Ti ola e della Ca ed a Jean Monne 2017-2020 (Commissione eu opea)
"Judicial P o ec ion o Fundamen al Righ s in he Eu opean A ea o F eedom, Secu i y and Jus ice"
COMITATO SCIENTIFICO
Se gio Ma ia Ca bone, P o esso e Eme i o, Uni e si à di Geno a
Robe a Cle ici, O dina io . . di Di i o In e nazionale p i a o, Uni e si à di Milano
Nigel Lowe, P o esso Eme i us, Uni e si y o Ca di
Paolo Mengozzi, P o esso e Eme i o, Uni e si à "Alma Ma e S udio um" di Bologna - già A oca o gene ale p esso la Co e di gius izia dell’UE
Massimo Panebianco, P o esso e Eme i o, Uni e si à di Sale no
Guido Raimondi, già P esiden e della Co e EDU - P esiden e di Sezione della Co e di Cassazione
Sil ana Scia a, P o esso e Eme i o, Uni e si à di Fi enze - Giudice della Co e Cos i uzionale
Giuseppe Tesau o, P o esso e . . di Di i o dell'UE, Uni e si à di Napoli "Fede ico II" - P esiden e Eme i o della Co e Cos i uzionale
An onio Tizzano, P o esso e Eme i o, Uni e si à di Roma “La Sapienza” - Vice P esiden e Eme i o della Co e di gius izia dell’UE
Ennio T iggiani, P o esso e Eme i o, Uni e si à di Ba i
Ugo Villani, P o esso e Eme i o, Uni e si à di Ba i
COMITATO EDITORIALE
Ma ia Ca e ina Ba u i, O dina io di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Ve ona
Giandona o Caggiano, O dina io . . di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à Roma T e
Al onso-Luis Cal o Ca a aca, Ca ed á ico de De echo In e nacional P i ado, Uni e sidad Ca los III de Mad id
Pablo An onio Fe nández-Sánchez, Ca ed á ico de De echo In e nacional, Uni e sidad de Se illa
Inge Go ae e, Di ec o o he Eu opean Legal S udies Depa men , College o Eu ope, B uges
Paola Mo i, O dina io di Di i o dell'Unione eu opea, Uni e si à "Magna G aecia" di Ca anza o
Lina Panella, O dina io di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Messina
Nicole a Pa isi, O dina io . . di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Ca ania - già Componen e ANAC
Lucia Se ena Rossi, O dina io di Di i o dell'UE, Uni e si à "Alma Ma e S udio um" di Bologna - Giudice della Co e di gius izia dell’UE
COMITATO DEI REFEREES
B uno Ba el, Associa o di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di Pado a
Ma co Ben enu i, O dina io di Is i uzioni di Di i o pubblico, Uni e si à di Roma "La Sapienza"
Ra aele Cadin, Associa o di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Roma “La Sapienza”
Ruggie o Ca a i Panico, O dina io . . di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di Milano
Ida Ca acciolo, O dina io di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à della Campania - Giudice dell’ITLOS
Fede ico Casola i, Associa o di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à “Alma Ma e S udio um” di Bologna
Luisa Casse i, O dina io di Is i uzioni di Di i o Pubblico, Uni e si à di Pe ugia
Gio anni Cellama e, O dina io di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Ba i
Ma cello Di Filippo, O dina io di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Pisa
Rosa io Espinosa Calabuig, Ca ed á ica de De echo In e nacional P i ado, Uni e si a de València
Ana C. Gallego He nández, P o eso a Ayudan e de De echo In e nacional Público y Relaciones In e nacionales, Uni e sidad de Se illa
Pie o Ga giulo, O dina io di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Te amo
Gianca lo Gua ino, O dina io . . di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Napoli “Fede ico II”
Elspe h Guild, Associa e Senio Resea ch Fellow, CEPS
Vic o Luis Gu ié ez Cas illo, P o eso de De echo In e nacional Público, Uni e sidad de Jaén
I an Ing a allo, Associa o di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Ba i
Paola I aldi, O dina io di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Geno a
Luigi Kalb, O dina io di P ocedu a Penale, Uni e si à di Sale no
Luisa Ma in, Ma ie Cu ie Fellow, Eu opean Uni e si y Ins i u e
Simone Ma inai, Associa o di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di Pisa
Fab izio Ma ongiu Buonaiu i, O dina io di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Mace a a
Daniela Ma ani,Rice ca o e di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Sale no
Ros ane Medhi, P o esseu de D oi Public, Uni e si é d’Aix-Ma seille
S e ano Mon aldo, Associa o di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di To ino
Viole a Mo eno-Lax, Senio Lec u e in Law, Queen Ma y Uni e si y o London
Claudia Mo iducci, P o esso e Senio di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à Roma T e
Michele Nino, Associa o di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Sale no
Anna O iolo, Associa o di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Sale no
Leona do Pasquali, Associa o di Di i o dell'Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di Pisa
Pie o Penne a, O dina io . . di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Sale no
Emanuela Pis oia, O dina io di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di Te amo
Conce a Ma ia Pon eco o, O dina io di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Napoli “Fede ico II”
Pie o Pus o ino, O dina io di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à LUISS di Roma
San iago Ripol Ca ulla, Ca ed á ico de De echo in e nacional público, Uni e si a Pompeu Fab a Ba celona
Gianpaolo Ma ia Ruo olo, O dina io di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Foggia
Te esa Russo, Associa o di Di i o dell'Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di Sale no
Alessand a A. Souza Sil ei a, Di e o a do Cen o de Es udos em Di ei o da UE, Uni e sidad do Minho
Ángel Tinoco Pas ana, P o eso de De echo P ocesal, Uni e sidad de Se illa
Chia a En ica Tuo, O dina io di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di Geno a
Tali ha Vassalli di Dachenhausen, O dina io . . di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Napoli “Fede ico II”
Alessand a Zanobe i, O dina io di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à “Alma Ma e S udio um” di Bologna
COMITATO DI REDAZIONE
F ancesco Buonomenna, Associa o di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di Sale no
Angela Fes a, Rice ca o e di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à della Campania “Luigi Van i elli”
Ca e ina F a ea, Associa o di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di Ve ona
Anna Ie mano, Rice ca o e di Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Sale no
Angela Ma one, Do o e di ice ca in Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di Sale no
Michele Messina, Associa o di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di Messina
Rossana Palladino (
Coo dina o e
), Rice ca o e di Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, Uni e si à di Sale no
Re isione linguis ica degli abs ac s a cu a di
F ancesco Campo eda
,
Do o e di ice ca in Di i o In e nazionale, Uni e si à di Sale no
Ri is a quad imes ale on line “F eedom, Secu i y & Jus ice: Eu opean Legal S udies”
www. sjeu os udies.eu
Edi o iale Scien i ica, Via San Biagio dei Lib ai, 39 - Napoli
CODICE ISSN 2532-2079 - Regis azione p esso il T ibunale di Noce a In e io e n° 3 del 3 ma zo 2017
Indice-Somma io
2022, n. 2
Édi o ial
Manda d’a ê eu opéen e dé aillances de l’É a de d oi : une analyse en deux é apes
Lucia Se ena Rossi
p. 1
Saggi e A icoli
La esponsabili à ci ile dell’imp esa ansnazionale pe iolazioni ambien ali e di di i i umani:
il con ibu o della p opos a di di e i a sulla due diligence socie a ia a ini di sos enibili à
Gab iella Ca ella
La condizione giu idica dello s anie o e il godimen o dei di i i sociali ondamen ali: la ecen e
giu isp udenza cos i uzionale (e il dialogo con la Co e di Lussembu go)
A mando Lambe i
Il con enzioso a Uc aina e Fede azione ussa da an i alla Co e eu opea dei di i i dell’uomo
Ricca do Pisillo Mazzeschi
Dalla p o ezione in e nazionale alla p o ezione immedia a. L’accoglienza degli s olla i
dall’Uc aina come ca ina di o nasole della p opos a di as o mazione
Emanuela Pis oia
Il Consiglio d’Eu opa e gli e e i giu idico-is i uzionali della gue a in Uc aina sul sis ema
con enzionale
Guido Raimondi
Luci e omb e della Con enzione di Nicosia
Tullio Sco azzi
In Sea ch o he Legal Bounda ies o an “Open Socie y”. The Case o Immig an In eg a ion in
he EU
Daniela Vi iello
Commen i e No e
Il di icile bilanciamen o a sicu ezza nazionale e u ela dei di i i ondamen ali nella “da a
e en ion saga” dinanzi alla Co e di gius izia
Gio anna Naddeo
p. 10
p. 42
p. 88
p. 101
p. 124
p. 140
p. 151
p. 188
La ses a di e i a an i iciclaggio e la sua a uazione nell’o dinamen o i aliano: alcune
conside azioni
Ma eo Sommella
Il Panop icon digi ale. I cookies a di i o e p a ica nell’Unione eu opea
Fla ia Zo zi Gius iniani
p. 218
p. 241
F eedom, Secu i y & Jus ice: Eu opean Legal S udies ISSN 2532-2079
2022, n. 2, pp. 151-187 DOI:10.26321/D.VITIELLO.02.2022.08
www. sjeu os udies.eu
IN
SEARCH
OF
THE
LEGAL
BOUNDARIES
OF
AN
“OPEN
SOCIETY”.
THE
CASE
OF
IMMIGRANT
INTEGRATION
IN
THE
EU
Daniela Vi iello*
T
ABLE OF CONTENTS
: 1. The EU as an open and plu alis socie y: The heo e ical and legal
p emises o Eu opean in eg a ion. – 2. The “mig a ion s a e”, he Eu opean Union
and immig an in eg a ion. – 3. Immig an in eg a ion in he EU: A ale o wo
app oaches. – 4. EU Membe S a es’ ac ion on immig an in eg a ion and he legal
bounda ies o cul u al plu alism in he EU. – 5. A minimalis app oach o non-
disc imina ion and he pa adox o openness. – 6. The “e e close Union” and i s
enemies: De ending openness in imes o c isis. – 7. Re hinking in eg a ion as a
“ iple win”: Insigh s om he EU esponse o he displacemen o Uk ainian ci izens.
– 8. S eamlining he New Pac on Mig a ion and Asylum o he goal o immig an
in eg a ion. – 9. The way ahead.
1. The EU as an open and plu alis socie y: The heo e ical and legal p emises o
Eu opean in eg a ion
The Eu opean Union is a legal o de based on a plu alis sys em o alues. As es i ied
by he EU mo o, di e si y is he epis emic backbone o he en i e p ocess o Eu opean
in eg a ion. This holds ue i s and o emos in ho izon al ela ions among he Membe
S a es, which a e all equal and whose di e si y – in e ms o legal and judicial sys ems,
ins i u ional se ings and na ional iden i ies – is exp essly ecognised, p o ec ed and
ope a ionalised unde EU law.
1
The same holds ue o Eu opean ci izens, whose mu ual
Double blind pee e iewed a icle.
* Resea che in EU Law, Uni e si y o Tuscia. E-mail daniela. i iello@uni us.i . The au ho is since ely
g a e ul o he anonymous e iewe s o hei aluable commen s and ema ks. All e o s a e my own.
1
See A . 4(2) and 19 TEU. On he ope a ionalisa ion o ho izon al di e si y in he EU, e e o he
p oli e a ion o echniques and ins umen s o di e en ia ed in eg a ion allowing he deepening o EU
in eg a ion in spi e o he inc easing he e ogenei y o in e es s, alues and capaci y. See F.
S
CHIMMELFENNING
, The Choice o Di e en ia ed Eu ope: An In e go e nmen alis Theo e ical
F amewo k, in Compa a i e Eu opean Poli ics, 2019, p. 176; E.
P
ISTOIA
, Limi i all’in eg azione
di e enzia a dell’Unione eu opea, Ba i, 2018; R.
D.
K
ELEMEN
, A. M
ENON
,
J.
S
LAPIN
, Wide and Deepe ?
Enla gemen and In eg a ion in he Eu opean Union, in Jou nal o Eu opean Public Policy, 2014, p. 647.

In Sea ch o he Legal Bounda ies o an “Open Socie y”
152
www. sjeu os udies.eu
sense o belonging o an “e e close Union”
2
is no oo ed in a p e-de e mined and
monoli hic ision o he “common good”.
3
On he con a y, i is nu u ed by he espec
o e e yone’s eedom, cul u e and way o li e,
4
which is in u n ensu ed by he capaci y
o EU law o con e upon indi iduals “ igh s which become pa o hei legal he i age”
and which na ional cou s mus p o ec .
5
These cons i u i e ea u es o he sys em –
accompanied by eedom o mo emen , he p inciple o non-disc imina ion, he igh s o
democ a ic pa icipa ion and poli ical ep esen a ion – ha e con ibu ed o s eng hening
he in e connec ions among Eu opean people and mi iga ed he lack o a s ong, na ional-
ype “Eu opean iden i y”.
6
Due o hese key ea u es, he Eu opean p ojec has been compa ed by poli ical
scien is s o he “open socie y” model
7
elabo a ed by he philosophe Ka l Poppe in he
a e ma h o he second Wo ld Wa .
8
In Poppe ’s iews, he open socie y does no
esemble a speci ic social sys em, bu a socie y in which eedom, ole ance, jus ice, and
he pu sui o knowledge “may be conside ed alues in hemsel es”.
9
A he same ime,
eedom and ole ance a e no absolu e alues, making an open socie y he ealm o
neu al ela i ism, whe e also o ms o agg essi e i a ionalism shall be ole a ed.
10
This
p oduces wo consequences o he ins i u ional and cons i u ional se ing o an open
socie y: i s , ha openness canno blossom in an “e hical s a e”.
11
Libe al democ acies,
as based on ee poli ical compe i ion, a e, indeed, he bes a ailable “means o he end”
o p ese ing an open socie y.
12
Second, an open socie y canno su i e wi hou a
ounding pac iden i ying he ins i u ional ools p ese ing eedom and ole ance agains
in ole able a acks.
13
2
A . 1 TEU, o which see Cou o Jus ice, G and Chambe , judgmen o 16 June 2005, Pupino, case C-
105/03, pa a. 41: “The second and hi d pa ag aphs o A icle 1 o he T ea y on Eu opean Union p o ide
ha ha ea y ma ks a new s age in he p ocess o c ea ing an e e close union among he peoples o
Eu ope and ha he ask o he Union (…) shall be o o ganise, in a manne demons a ing consis ency and
solida i y, ela ions be ween he Membe S a es and be ween hei peoples”.
3
S.
P
RALONG
, Minima Mo alia. Is The e an E hics o he Open Socie y?, in I.
J
ARVIE
,
S.
P
RALONG
(eds.),
Poppe ’s Open Socie y A e Fi y Yea s. The Con inuing Rele ance o Ka l Poppe , London, 2003, p. 132.
4
A . 3(3) TEU, o which see, e.g., Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 22 Decembe 2010, Ilonka Sayn-
Wi gens ein, case C-208/09. Fo a commen , e e o: G.
D
I
F
EDERICO
, Iden i ying Cons i u ional Iden i ies
in he Case Law o he Cou o Jus ice o he Eu opean Union, in Il Di i o dell’Unione eu opea, 2014, p.
769.
5
Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 5 Feb ua y 1963, Van Gend en Loos, case 26-62.
6
On he ole o undamen al igh s and he p inciple o non-disc imina ion in he o ma ion o Eu opean
iden i y, see E.
G
UILD
, The Legal Elemen s o Eu opean Iden i y. EU Ci izenship and Mig a ion Law,
London, 2004, ch. 11.
7
See E.
G
ELLNER
, Na ions and Na ionalism. New Pe spec i es on he Pas , Ox o d, 1983; J.
R
UPNIK
,
J.
Z
IELONKA
(eds.), The Roads o he Eu opean Union, ol. 1, Manches e , 2003.
8
K.
P
OPPER
, The Open Socie y and I s Enemies, P ince on, 2020 (1s ed. 1945).
9
K.
P
OPPER
, The E ewhonians and he Open Socie y, in ETC: A Re iew o Gene al Seman ics, 1963, p. 14.
10
Re e o he e y amous “pa adox o in ole ance”, desc ibed in ch. 7 o K. P
OPPER
, The Open Socie y
and I s Enemies, ci .
11
Ibid., p. 510.
12
K.
P
OPPER
, The E ewhonians and he Open Socie y, ci ., p. 14.
13
R.
D
AHRENDORF
, Re lec ions on he Re olu ion in Eu ope, London, 1990, iii. On he igh o “sel
de ense” o ole an socie ies, see J.
R
AWLS
, A Theo y o Jus ice, Ha a d, 1971, p. 220. On he alue o
ole ance in shaping he EU legal o de , see J.
H.
W
EILER
, Fede alism wi hou Cons i u ionalism: Eu ope’s
Daniela Vi iello
153
The Union – as a sup ana ional communi y o na ional poli ies – de ises i s
ounda ional solida i y and uni ying elemen in he “ iangula ela ionship” be ween he
ule o law, he democ a ic p inciple and undamen al igh s. These libe al democ a ic
alues a e, simul aneously, ools o inclusion/exclusion and o e a ching p inciples
s ee ing he p ocess o Eu opean in eg a ion. On he one hand, hey ha e o be exhibi ed
by hi d S a es o ob ain he legal s anding o candida e coun ies, since hey quali y as
p e- equisi es o joining he EU.
14
On he o he , hei espec and p omo ion imply and
jus i y mu ual us among he EU Membe S a es
15
and Eu opean ci izens’ con idence in
sup ana ional ins i u ions, which a e i al o os e he de elopmen o “an a ea o
eedom, secu i y and jus ice wi hou in e nal on ie s”.
16
As a esul , he Union’s
poli ical legi imacy es s on he capaci y o sha e hese axiological p emises among he
Eu opean ins i u ions, he Membe S a es, he candida e coun ies, and he indi iduals
hemsel es, so ha con lic s o alues and in e es s do no gene a e unila e alism, ea
and closu e. A he same ime, a libe al pa adox a ec s he Union and i s Membe S a es:
sa egua ding in e nal openness may equi e highe deg ees o closu e, especially in
u bulen imes. This pa adox may impac he ea men o aliens and hei legal s anding
wi hin he Union, by hwa ing hei ques o legal en i lemen s and democ a ic
pa icipa ion.
This pape seeks o es he openness o he Union by aking as a case s udy a speci ic
aspec o he EU mig a ion policy: he in eg a ion o e hnically and cul u ally di e se
mig an popula ion in o EU Membe S a es’ socie ies. Since i aims o econside he legal
bounda ies o he EU as an “open socie y”, he complex and ich deba e on he di e si y
o in eg a ion models a he na ional le el is ou o he scope o his analysis, which
ocuses ins ead on he wo models which ha e inspi ed he de elopmen o he EU
immig an in eg a ion policy. In he as li e a u e on his policy, he dialec ics be ween
hese models is p edominan ly b ough back o he limi s o EU compe ence.
17
Howe e ,
his pape con ends ha “a mo e igo ous in eg a ion policy” a he EU le el can be
e ec i ely pu sued wi hin he limi s o he compe ences con e ed upon he Union in his
ield and ha his shi would help educe ic ions unde pinning ansna ional go e nance
o human mobili y owa ds he EU.
Sonde weg, in K.
N
ICOLAIDIS
,
R.
H
OWSE
(eds.), The Fede al Vision: Legi imacy and Le els o Go e nance
in he Uni ed S a es and he Eu opean Union, Ox o d, 2001, p. 65.
14
A . 49 TEU and he Copenhagen c i e ia, o which see S.
C
ARRERA
,
E.
G
UILD
,
N.
H
ERNANZ
, The
T iangula Rela ionship be ween Fundamen al Righ s, Democ acy and Rule o law in he EU – Towa ds
an EU Copenhagen Mechanism. S udy eques ed by he LIBE Commi ee, Eu opean Pa liamen , PE
493.031, 2013, p. 30.
15
Cou o Jus ice, Full Cou , opinion o 18 Decembe 2014, Accession o he Eu opean Union o he
Eu opean Con en ion o he P o ec ion o Human Righ s and Fundamen al F eedoms, opinion 2/13, pa as
166-169.
16
See A s 3(2) TEU and 67 TFEU.
17
See, ecen ly, U.
B
RANDL
, In eg a ion in he New Pac : A Di icul Comp omise be ween a Limi ed EU
Compe ence and a Success ul Policy, in EU Immig a ion and Asylum Law and Policy, 26 Ma ch 2021,
eumig a ionlawblog.eu. On he na u e o his compe ence, see amplius D.
T
HYM
,
K.
H
AILBRONNER
(eds.),
EU Immig a ion and Asylum Law: A icle-by-A icle Commen a y, Ox o d-Baden-Baden, 2022, pp. 271-
282.
In Sea ch o he Legal Bounda ies o an “Open Socie y”
154
www. sjeu os udies.eu
2. The “mig a ion s a e”, he Eu opean Union and immig an in eg a ion
In a seminal a icle o he ea ly wen y- i s cen u y, Holli ield main ained ha he las
wo cen u ies “ha e seen he eme gence o he mig a ion s a e, whe e egula ion o
in e na ional mig a ion is as impo an as p o iding o he secu i y o he s a e and he
economic well being o he ci izen y”.
18
This de ini ion cap u es one o he key pa adoxes
o libe al democ acies: ha an open socie y does no imply open bo de s
19
and he
dema ca ion line be ween he ecogni ion o a o eigne as a hospes o a hos is lies in he
sense o insecu i y o domes ic cons i uencies.
20
E en i he EU is a sui gene is in e na ional o ganisa ion, which does exe cise some
p e oga i es ha a e ypically associa ed o s a ehood, concep ualising he Union wi hin
he emi o he “mig a ion s a e” canno be a s aigh o wa d ope a ion. On he one hand,
Eu opean in eg a ion led o he es ablishmen o an A ea o F eedom, Secu i y and Jus ice
(AFSJ), conside ed as a legal space cha ac e ised by he pu sui o common goals. In his
legal space, he alloca ion o esponsibili ies is mos ly compe ence-d i en, while he
p inciple o e i o iali y is only one o he possible “ju isdic ional ga eways”.
21
On he
o he , he “p oduc ion” o a Eu opean e i o ial space has been pa alleled by he
eme gence o secu i ised ex e nal bo de s, sa egua ding he in eg i y o Schengen
coope a ion while p ese ing in e nal openness.
22
The s uc u al ensions unde pinning he AFSJ ha e been mo e e iden in hose ields
o sha ed compe ence which a e adi ionally sensi i e o he calls o so e eign y, such
as he policies on mig a ion and asylum. As a esul , Holli ield’s concep o “mig a ion
s a e” has been adjus ed o he speci ici y o he AFSJ as a space whe e he Membe S a es
ha e e ained hei igh o include and exclude aliens, al hough i s exe cise ough o be
aligned o he legal ajec o ies ou lined by he no ma i e backbone o he p ocess o
Eu opean in eg a ion.
This has been explici ly ecognised by he Eu opean Commission in he new Eu opean
Agenda on Cul u e,
23
whe e i s essed he unc ional nexus ha exis s be ween he
18
J.
F.
H
OLLIFIELD
, The Eme ging Mig a ion S a e, in The In e na ional Mig a ion Re iew, 2004, p. 885.
19
Ibid., p. 887. See also, G.
S
ARTORI
, Plu alismo, mul icul u alismo e es anei. Saggio sulla socie à
mul ie nica, Milano, 2000.
20
A.
S
CIURBA
, Le pa ole dell’asilo: un di i o di con ine, To ino, 2021.
21
On he ele ance o a “su icien ly close link wi h he e i o y” o he EU, see Cou o Jus ice, judgmen
o 30 Ap il 1996, Boukhal a, case C-214/94, pa a. 15; on connec ion c i e ia based on he p oduc ion o
e ec s in he EU legal o de , see Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 12 June 2014, In el . Commission, case T‐
286/09, pa as 231-236; on compe ence-d i en esponsibili y o ex a e i o ial ac i i ies, equi ing hese
ac i i ies o be “go e ned by EU law”, see Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 7 Ma ch 2017, X and X, case
C-638/16 PPU, pa as 44-48; judgmen o 26 Ap il 2018, Donnellan, case C-34/17.
22
On he de elopmen o an in eg a ed managemen sys em o ex e nal bo de s a he EU le el, see D.
V
ITIELLO
, Le on ie e es e ne dell’Unione eu opea, Ba i, 2020; on ela ed challenges, see I.
I
NGRAVALLO
,
Il ispe o dei di i i ondamen ali nell’azione dell’Agenzia eu opea della gua dia di on ie a e cos ie a,
in I.
C
ARACCIOLO
,
G.
C
ELLAMARE
,
A.
D
I
S
TASI
,
P.
G
ARGIULO
(a cu a di), Mig azioni in e nazionali.
Ques ioni giu idiche ape e, Napoli, 2022, p. 111.
23
Communica ion om he Commission o he Eu opean Pa liamen , he Council, he Eu opean Economic
and Social Commi ee and he Commi ee o he Regions, A New Eu opean Agenda o Cul u e, o 22 May
2018, COM(2018) 267 inal.
Daniela Vi iello
155
“Eu opean Union’s model o openness and solida i y, based on he ule o law”
24
and he
e ec i e in eg a ion o g oups wi h a mig an backg ound, depic ing his nexus as a
pa hway o Eu opean iden i y o ma ion.
25
Bu in eg a ing mig an popula ions in he EU is no only a policy op ion o enhance
openness and social cohesion, i has a legal s anding in he Lisbon T ea y, whe e
in eg a ing legally esiding hi d coun y na ionals (TCNs) quali ies as a goal o he
Union.
26
A he same ime, TCN in eg a ion cons i u es a pi o al challenge o he AFSJ
and he Common Eu opean Asylum Sys em (CEAS). The legal design o he o me
po ays i as a legal space in which he “ ai ea men ” o TCNs shall be g an ed,
27
he
p inciple o non-disc imina ion is amed as a c oss-cu ing igh
28
and he sea ch o
g ea e inclusion and social cohesion shall be pu sued a all le els o go e nance. The
la e is in ended o o e an app op ia e s a us o any hi d-coun y na ional equi ing
in e na ional p o ec ion, while ensu ing compliance o emo al decisions a ec ing TCNs
wi h he p inciple o non- e oulemen .
29
Success ul in eg a ion o TCNs is co ela ed o he ull achie emen o hese goals, as
a necessa y p econdi ion o (and ou come o ) e ec i e immig a ion and asylum policies,
30
which may ensu e mo e sus ainable and less coe ci e bo de and e u n policies.
Howe e , TCN in eg a ion is also one o hose compe ences in which ha monisa ion o
Membe S a es’ legisla ion is excluded by p ima y law and he ole o he EU is limi ed
o suppo ac ions. Thus, es ing he openness o he Union in ela ion o TCN in eg a ion
equi es a p io unde s anding o he a ionales o he inclusion/exclusion o aliens,
which unde pin he de elopmen o EU immig an in eg a ion policy
31
(pa a. 3) and shape
he legal bounda ies o EU Membe S a es’ ac ion in his ield (pa a. 4). This analysis
sheds ligh on he unc ioning o he p inciple o non-disc imina ion wi hin he AFSJ
(pa a. 5), which has simila ly impac ed he CEAS (pa a. 6).
Depa ing om he laws ha ha e eme ged om his analysis, a mo e igo ous EU
commi men o “in eg a ion- h ough-di e si y” is ad oca ed. The analysis seeks o
demons a e ha such an app oach would be consis en wi h he ques o openness o
24
In hese e ms, EU Fundamen al Righ s Agency, Speech by Commissione Jou o á – 10 yea s o he EU
Fundamen al Righ s Agency: A call o ac ion in de ence o undamen al igh s, democ acy and he ule o
law, Vienna, 28 Feb ua y 2017.
25
Communica ion om he Commission o he Eu opean Pa liamen , he Council, he Eu opean Economic
and Social Commi ee and he Commi ee o he Regions, S eng hening Eu opean Iden i y h ough
Educa ion and Cul u e, o 14 No embe 2017, COM(2017) 673 inal, p. 3.
26
See A . 79(4) TFEU.
27
A s 79(1) and 67(2) TFEU, o which see D.
T
HYM
, EU Mig a ion Policy and i s Cons i u ional
Ra ionale, in Common Ma ke Law Re iew, 2013, p. 723; A.
B
ALDACCINI
,
E.
G
UILD
,
H.
T
ONER
(eds.),
Whose F eedom, Secu i y and Jus ice? EU Immig a ion and Asylum Law and Policy, Ox o d, 2007.
28
C.
F
AVILLI
, La non disc iminazione nell’Unione eu opea, Bologna, 2008.
29
A . 78(1) TFEU, o which see S.
P
EERS
, Legisla i e Upda e: EU Immig a ion and Asylum Compe ence
and Decision-Making in he T ea y o Lisbon, in Eu opean Jou nal o Mig a ion and Law, 2008, p. 232.
30
S.
C
ARRERA
,
A.
F
AURE
A
TGER
, In eg a ion as a Two-Way P ocess in he EU? Assessing he Rela ionship
be ween he Eu opean In eg a ion Fund and he Common Basic P inciples on In eg a ion, Cen e o
Eu opean Policy S udies (CEPS) Resea ch Pape , B ussels, 2011.
31
A seminal book, on which his a icle d aws, is: L.
A
ZOULAI
,
K.
M.
DE
V
RIES
(eds.), EU Mig a ion Law.
Legal Complexi ies and Poli ical Ra ionales, Ox o d, 2014.
In Sea ch o he Legal Bounda ies o an “Open Socie y”
162
www. sjeu os udies.eu
can be conside ed “ ai ” and undamen al igh s-complian wi hin he meaning o A . 67
TFEU.
83
This “emp y box” app oach o immig an cul u al in eg a ion, which is ob iously
also connec ed o he limi s o EU compe ence in he cul u al ield,
84
has allowed a well-
documen ed policy shi om mig an - iendly ools in o ins umen s o mig a ion
con ol
85
o “unwan ed” immig an s.
86
By linking he ce i ica ion o linguis ic skills and/o knowledge o he hos cul u e o
he enjoymen o social and economic igh s, Membe S a es ha e sough o each wo
main goals:
87
i s , con olling en y o pu poses o amily euni ica ion; and second,
casualising access o long- e m esidence and/o o simila s a us unde na ional law. The
i s goal has been mos ly achie ed h ough p e-en y in eg a ion es s,
88
whe eas he
second has been a ained h ough manda o y language cou ses
89
o unequal in eg a ion
“con ac s” which he indi idual is obliged o sign wi h he hos S a e.
90
While he pu pose
o in eg a ion clauses in EU seconda y legisla ion is os e ing a “con inuous wo-way
p ocess o mu ual accommoda ion”,
91
hese policies u n in eg a ion in o a “one way”
83
Ph. D
E
B
RUYCKER
, Legisla i e Ha moniza ion in Eu opean Immig a ion Policy, in E.
M
ACDONALD
,
R.
C
HOLEWINSKI
,
R.
P
ERRUCHOUD
(eds.), In e na ional Mig a ion Law: De eloping Pa adigms and Key
Challenges, The Hague, 2007, p. 329.
84
On hese limi s, see he combined eading o A s 6 and 167 TFEU, and A . 22 o he EU Cha e o
Fundamen al Righ s (EUCFR).
85
A.
B
ÖCKER
,
T.
S
TRIK
, Language and Knowledge Tes s o Pe manen Residence Righ s: Help o
Hind ance o In eg a ion?, in Eu opean Jou nal o Mig a ion and Law, 2011, p. 157; I.
A
DAM
,
D.
T
HYM
,
In eg a ion, in Ph. D
E
B
RUYCKER
,
M.
D
E
S
OMER
,
J.-L.
D
E
B
ROUWER
(eds.), F om Tampe e 20 o Tampe e
2.0: Towa ds a new Eu opean consensus on mig a ion, Eu opean Policy Cen e, B ussels, Decembe 2019,
p. 80.
86
Con a, see A . 17(3) o Di ec i e (EU) 2021/1883 o he Eu opean Pa liamen and o he Council, on
he condi ions o en y and esidence o hi d-coun y na ionals o he pu pose o highly quali ied
employmen , and epealing Council Di ec i e 2009/50/EC, o 20 Oc obe 2021, in OJ L382, 28 Oc obe
2021, pp. 1-38, acco ding o which in eg a ion condi ions can be applied o highly skilled mig an s only
a e hey ha e been g an ed amily euni ica ion. See also A . 18 on he EU long- e m esiden s a us o
Blue Ca d holde s. Fo a commen , S.
P
EERS
, The e ised Blue Ca d Di ec i e: he EU’s sea ch o mo e
highly skilled non-EU mig an s, in EU Law Analysis, 20 May 2021, eulawanalysis. Fo a b oade analysis,
see P. G
ARGIULO
, Le inizia i e dell’Unione eu opea pe a a e alen i e compe enze e la i o ma della
Di e i a Ca a Blu, in I.
C
ARACCIOLO
,
G.
C
ELLAMARE
,
A.
D
I
S
TASI
,
P.
G
ARGIULO
(a cu a di), Mig azioni
in e nazionali, ci ., p. 465.
87
R.
W
ODAK
,
S.
B
OUKALA
, (Sup a)Na ional Iden i y and Language: Re hinking Na ional and Eu opean
Mig a ion Policies and he Linguis ic In eg a ion o Mig an s, in Annual Re iew o Applied Linguis ics,
2015, p. 259.
88
Acco ding o G.
S
OLANO
,
T.
H
UDDLESTON
, Mig an In eg a ion Policy Index 2020. Measu ing policies
o in eg a e mig an s ac oss i e con inen s, Mig a ion Policy G oup, Ba celona-B ussels, 2020, p. 24, p e-
en y language equi emen s o pu poses on amily euni ica ion a e no so sp ead wo ldwide, howe e he
majo i y o coun ies imposing hem is loca ed in Eu ope. In addi ion, he au ho s poin ou ha language
equi emen s ha e been igh ened in mos EU Membe S a es, “making i as di icul o immig an s o
become pe manen esiden s as i is o hem o become ci izens” (p. 36).
89
Fo ins ance, in he Ne he lands, mee ing ci ic in eg a ion equi emen s is a p e- equisi e o pe manen
esidence and na u alisa ion (see: Ad hoc que y 2020/74 on measu es ega ding ci ic in eg a ion – Pa 2,
eques ed by he Eu opean Mig a ion Ne wo k Na ional Con ac Poin G eece on 1 Decembe 2020, p. 28,
www.emn.l ).
90
This is he case o I aly, whe e a penal y o e oca ion o esidence pe mi and expulsion is imposed on
mig an s who do no ul il language and ci ic equi emen s se o h in he in eg a ion ag eemen . See Ad
hoc que y 2020/74 on measu es ega ding ci ic in eg a ion, ci ., p. 21.
91
Common Basic P inciples, p. 1, pa . 1.

Daniela Vi iello
163
p ocess making he alien “one o us”.
92
The hia us be ween his assimila ionis a ionale
and he cul u al plu alism unde pinning he EU legal o de – bo h as a s uc u al p inciple
and as he key ule s ee ing EU ci izenship – is no iceable. In ligh o he e e u ile o he
in eg a ion clauses in EU seconda y legisla ion, he hos S a e should help emo e
linguis ic and cul u al ba ie s o TCN in eg a ion by means o in eg a ion measu es
which should be ailo ed o he speci ic in eg a ion needs o he ecipien s and aimed a
enhancing social cohesion, inclusion and ole ance.
93
On he con a y, in many Membe
S a es’ implemen ing p ac ice, he TCNs’ scan pe o mance in linguis ic o ci ic es s
has become a g ound o exclusion; hus, downg ading he igh o amily uni y o a me e
in e es o be balanced wi h he S a e’s mig a ion (and cul u al) goals, o e en dis o ed
o he poin o becoming a g ound o s a us dep i a ion, u ning “ egula ” in o “i egula ”
immig an s by le e aging on in eg a ion pu poses.
94
This na ional p ac ice has been challenged in a numbe o p elimina y ulings, in which
he Cou o Jus ice has cla i ied ha language es s canno be amed as a p e- equisi e
o amily euni ica ion,
95
ci ic in eg a ion es s shall no make he exe cise o he igh o
amily euni ica ion impossible o excessi ely di icul ,
96
no cons i u e an exp ess o
hidden condi ion o main aining he s a us o long- e m esiden o exe cising he igh s
associa ed wi h i .
97
Acco ding o he Cou , “[ ]he ac ha he concep o in eg a ion is
no de ined canno be in e p e ed as au ho ising he Membe S a es o employ ha concep
in a manne con a y o gene al p inciples o Communi y law, in pa icula o undamen al
igh s”.
98
The e o e, in eg a ion condi ions imposed by he Membe S a es a e legi ima e
92
M.
J
ESSE
(ed.), Eu opean Socie ies, “O he ness”, Mig a ion, and he Law, Camb idge, 2020; W.
K
YMLICKA
, Mul icul u al Odysseys. Na iga ing he New In e na ional Poli ics o Di e si y, Ox o d, 2007;
A.
T
RIANDAFYLLIDOU
, Na ional Iden i y and he “O he ”, in E hnic and Racial S udies, 1998, p. 593.
93
Acco ding o he Associa ion o Language Tes e s in Eu ope (ALTE) and he Language Assessmen o
Mig a ion and In eg a ion (LAMI) G oup, he implemen a ion o in eg a ion clauses should be guided by a
lexible and ailo -made app oach, adjus ing he equi ed le el o p o iciency o indi idual needs. Vice
e sa, when in eg a ion condi ions a e concei ed o as a “ga ekeepe ”, hey p esen uni o m o ma and
con en , co esponding o p e- ixed p o iciency le els. See ALTE, Language es s o access, in eg a ion
and ci izenship: An ou line o policy make s. S udy commissioned by he Council o Eu ope, Camb idge,
Janua y 2016.
94
See u he , M.
J
ESSE
, The Ci ic Ci izens o Eu ope: The Legal Po en ial o Immig an In eg a ion in
he EU, Belgium, and he Uni ed Kingdom, Leiden, 2017.
95
Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 10 July 2014, Dogan, case C-138/13, pa a. 39. See also G and Chambe ,
judgmen o 12 Ap il 2016, Genc, case C‑561/14, pa a. 56, whe e he Cou acknowledged ha “ he
objec i e o ensu ing he success ul in eg a ion o hi d-coun y na ionals in he Membe S a e conce ned
(…) may cons i u e an o e iding eason in he public in e es ”. Howe e , i s essed ha es ic ions on
amily euni ica ion, mo i a ed by he me e lack o su icien p e-en y ies be ween a amily membe
esiding in a hi d coun y and he hos Membe S a e whe e he sponso esides, canno be pe se jus i ied
in he public in e es .
96
Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 9 July 2015, K and A, case C-153/14, pa as 63-64. See also he o de o 10
June 2011, Im an, case C-155/11 PPU. The case was dismissed by he Cou because a esidence pe mi
had been issued jus be o e he hea ing; howe e , i is no ewo hy he Commission’s s ance acco ding o
which A . 7(2) o Di ec i e 2003/86, ci ., does no allow Membe S a es o deny en y on he sole g ound
o ailu e o a p e-en y ci ic in eg a ion es .
97
Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 4 June 2015, P & S, case C-579/13; see also he Opinion o Ad oca e
Gene al M.
S
ZPUNAR
, deli e ed on 28 Janua y 2015, in he case C-579/13, P & S, pa a. 58.
98
Cou o Jus ice, G and Chambe , judgmen o 27 June 2006, case C-540/03, Eu opean Pa liamen .
Council, pa a. 70.
In Sea ch o he Legal Bounda ies o an “Open Socie y”
164
www. sjeu os udies.eu
as long as hey os e “in e ac ion and he de elopmen o social ela ions”,
99
bu canno
un coun e o “ he gene al objec i e o acili a ing he in eg a ion o hi d coun y
na ionals”, no make use o “an unspeci ied concep o in eg a ion”.
100
The cen ali y o he p opo ionali y assessmen o na ional in eg a ion measu es in
ligh o he e e u ile o ele an EU seconda y legisla ion has been also es ed in hose
cases in which he Membe S a es made he esidence pe mi condi ional on a ci ic
in eg a ion examina ion. The Cou unde lined ha ailu e in he es canno au oma ically
igge a e usal o a esidence pe mi wi hou aking in o accoun bo h he pe sonal
si ua ion o he applican (including age, le el o educa ion, economic si ua ion, heal h
condi ions, e o s made o pass he es , e c.) and he accessibili y o he es i sel (i.e.
he basic le el and a ailabili y wi hou in ol ing paymen o excessi e ees).
101
I is,
he e o e, o na ional cou s o asce ain – on a case-by-case basis – ha domes ic
in eg a ion equi emen s do no “go beyond wha is necessa y o a ain he objec i e o
acili a ing he in eg a ion o he hi d coun y na ionals conce ned”.
102
Hence, s eamlining he legal bounda ies o EU Membe S a es’ ac ion on immig an
in eg a ion o he p ese a ion o cul u al plu alism seems o equi e a es ic i e
in e p e a ion o he Membe S a es’ disc e ion ea u ing in eg a ion clauses in EU
seconda y law on mig a ion. This would be necessa y o a oid hem en iching na ional
oolboxes o mig a ion con ainmen mechanisms by means o obliga ions o esul s
equi ing TCNs o demons a e a ce ain command o a na ional language and cul u e o
ob ain o e ain he igh s o amily uni y and long- e m esidence, g an ed by EU law.
103
5. A minimalis app oach o non-disc imina ion and he pa adox o openness
The es ablishmen o he AFSJ as a legal space in which he p inciple o equali y is
amed as a s uc u al p inciple and a c oss-cu ing igh is one o he main achie emen s
o he p ocess o Eu opean in eg a ion.
104
Wi hin his a ea, TCNs can ce ainly ely upon
he gene al non-disc imina ion clause, p o ec ing “e e yone” om unjus i ied and
disp opo iona e di e en ial ea men based on pe sonal cha ac e is ics.
105
99
Cou o Jus ice, K and A, ci ., pa a. 53 P & S, ci ., pa a. 47.
100
Cou o Jus ice, G and Chambe , Eu opean Pa liamen . Council, ci ., pa a. 70.
101
Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 7 No embe 2018, C and A, case C-257/17, pa as 62-65.
102
Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 7 No embe 2018, K, case C‑484/17, pa a. 21.
103
Y.
P
ASCOUAU
,
H.
L
ABAYLE
, Condi ions o Family Reuni ica ion unde S ain. A Compa a i e S udy in
Nine EU Membe S a es, Eu opean Policy Cen e, B ussels, No embe 2011, p. 101. Mo e gene ally, on
he in eg a ion o TCNs’ amily membe s, see R.
P
ALLADINO
, L’in eg azione dei amilia i dei ci adini di
Paesi e zi egola men e soggio na i: e so la de inizione di nuo i s anda d a li ello eu opeo?, in G.
C
AGGIANO
(a cu a di), I pe co si giu idici pe l’in eg azione, ci ., p. 271.
104
Mo e b oadly, on legal equali y as he o e a ching p inciple s ee ing bo h in e go e nmen al and
in e indi idual ela ions in he EU, see L.
S.
R
OSSI
,
F.
C
ASOLARI
, The P inciple o Equali y in EU Law,
Cham, 2017.
105
See A . 19 TFEU and A s 20 and 21(1) EUCFR, which – con a y o A . 14 o he Eu opean
Con en ion on Human Righ s (ECHR) – a e sel -s anding p o isions. On he gene al non-disc imina ion
clause, see Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 10 July 2008, Fe yn, case C-54/07. On he no ion o “e hnic o igin”
Daniela Vi iello
165
Howe e , he scope o he p o ec ion s emming om he p inciple o equali y has been
in luenced by he a ionale o non-disc imina ion on na ional basis, which is closely
bound o bo h he con igu a ion o Union’s ci izenship as he “ undamen al s a us o
na ionals o Membe S a es”
106
and he di ec ly applicable igh s o ee mo emen wi hin
he single ma ke .
107
This a ionale, which has been accep ed and acknowledged by he
Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s
,
108
de e mines a minimalis app oach o non-
disc imina ion owa ds TCNs, om which h ee majo consequences can be disce ned.
Fi s , while he p inciple o non-disc imina ion based on na ionali y is limi ed o EU
ci izens only,
109
“ ai ness” owa ds TCNs emains a ague “quasi-legal” concep .
110
Thus,
he la e seldom ansla es in o posi i e obliga ions on Membe S a es, “wi h
co esponding clea ly de ined indi idual igh s”
111
ha mig an s may claim be o e
domes ic cou s. Ins ead, i o en imposes a gene al du y on na ional au ho i ies o
conside TCNs’ in e es s in he design o domes ic mig a ion policies bu lea es hem a
wide ma gin o app ecia ion on how o cope wi h his du y.
In his sense, he obliga ion o g an TCNs long- e m esidence s a us is illus a i e.
112
Acco ding o Di ec i e 2003/109/EC, “long- e m esiden s should enjoy in p inciple
equali y o ea men wi h ci izens o he Membe S a e in a wide ange o economic and
o pu poses o di ec /indi ec disc imina ion based on he coun y o bi h, see Cou o Jus ice, judgmen
o 6 Ap il 2017, Jyske Finans, case C‑668/15, pa a. 33.
106
Cou o Jus ice, G and Chambe , judgmen o 15 July 2021, A (Public heal hca e), case C‑535/19, pa a.
41; judgmen o 18 Janua y 2022, Wiene Landes egie ung, case C‑118/20, pa a. 38.
107
S.
I
GLESIAS
S
ÁNCHEZ
, Fundamen al Righ s P o ec ion o Thi d Coun y Na ionals and Ci izens o he
Union, in Eu opean Jou nal o Mig a ion and Law, 2013, p. 149.
108
See, e.g., Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s, judgmen o 18 Feb ua y 1991, applica ion no. 12313/86,
Mous aquim . Belgium, pa a. 49, and judgmen o 21 June 2011, applica ion no. 5335/05, Ponoma yo i e
al. . Bulga ia, pa a. 54, whe e compa abili y be ween EU ci izens and legally esiding aliens is excluded
on accoun o he ac ha “ he Union o ms a special legal o de , which has, mo eo e , es ablished i s own
ci izenship”.
109
A . 18 TFEU and A . 21(2) EUCFR. The limi ed pe sonal scope o he p inciple o non-disc imina ion
on na ional basis has been exp essly ecognised by he Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 4 June 2009, Va sou as
and Koupa an ze, joined cases C-22/08 and C-23/08, pa a. 52; and, e en i less explici ly, judgmen o 13
June 2013, Hadj Ahmed, case C-45/12, pa a. 41. Fo u he eading, see E.
B
ROUWER
,
K.
DE
V
RIES
, Thi d-
Coun y Na ionals and Disc imina ion on he G ound o Na ionali y: A icle 18 TFEU in he Con ex o
A icle 14 ECHR and EU Mig a ion Law: Time o a New App oach, in M.
V
AN DEN
B
RINK
,
S.
B
URRI
,
J.
G
OLDSCHMIDT
(eds.), Equali y and Human Righ s: No hing bu T ouble? Libe Amico um Ti ia Loenen,
U ech , 2015, p. 123.
110
In his sense, see, e.g., Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s, judgemen o 25 Ma ch 2014, applica ion no.
38590/10, Biao . Denma k, pa a. 79.
111
Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 4 Ma ch 2010, Chak oun, case C-578/08, pa a. 41. Simila ly, G and
Chambe , Eu opean Pa liamen . Council, ci ., pa as 60-62, wi h e e ence o A . 4(1) o Council
Di ec i e 2003/86/EC, ci . Fo an app aisal o Membe S a es’ disc e ion pu suan o his ac , see Cou o
Jus ice, judgmen o 17 July 2014, Noo zia, case C‑338/13, pa as 14-16. Fo u he eading, D.
T
HYM
,
K.
H
AILBRONNER
(eds.), EU Immig a ion and Asylum Law, ci ., p. 275.
112
On he limi s o Council Di ec i e 2003/109/CE, ci ., om he pe spec i e o TCNs’ ea men , see L.
D
ANIELE
, Immig azione e in eg azione. Il con ibu o dell’Unione eu opea, in G.
C
AGGIANO
(a cu a di), I
pe co si giu idici pe l’in eg azione, ci ., p. 67; P.
D
E
P
ASQUALE
, L’accesso degli immig a i i egola i ai
se izi pubblici, ibidem, p. 621 . Fo u he eading on he ecas p oposal o Di ec i e 2003/109/EC, see
A.
D
I
S
TASI
, La p e is a i o ma della di e i a sul soggio nan e di lungo pe iodo: limi i applica i i e
s iluppi giu isp udenziali, in I.
C
ARACCIOLO
,
G.
C
ELLAMARE
,
A.
D
I
S
TASI
,
P.
G
ARGIULO
(a cu a di),
Mig azioni in e nazionali, ci ., p. 435.
In Sea ch o he Legal Bounda ies o an “Open Socie y”
166
www. sjeu os udies.eu
social ma e s”,
113
oge he wi h ee mo emen igh s. Pe manen esidence is in ac a
key igge o in eg a ion
114
and he s a us associa ed o i is he i s o mal achie emen
in a p ocess o c ea ion o he genuine links
115
ha may lead o na u alisa ion and
ci izenship.
116
Howe e , he same di ec i e allows Membe S a es o limi he enjoymen
o “equali y on pape ” in he ield o social assis ance o “co e bene i s”,
117
lea ing o
na ional cou s he balancing exe cise o he p opo ionali y o he cons ain in ligh o
TCNs’ basic needs.
118
This also applies o TCNs’ access o he labou ma ke , which is
embedded in a con adic o y and agmen ed legal amewo k: on he one hand, i is
ecognised as a majo ca alys o in eg a ion;
119
on he o he , i s enjoymen depends on
na ional au ho isa ion egimes designed o a ain immig a ion goals.
120
The hia us be ween
“equali y on pape ” a he EU le el, and expanding di e en ial ea men s in domes ic
p ac ice, gene a es socio-economic ulne abili y and p eca isa ion, o en se ing aside he
goal o in eg a ion.
121
The second consequence o he EU’s minimalis app oach o non-disc imina ion
owa ds TCNs is o allow di e ences in ea men ha may a ise om he de e mina ion
o hei legal s a us.
122
In ac , Eu opean an i-disc imina ion law co e s he enjoymen o
113
Council Di ec i e 2003/109/EC, ci ., eci al 12.
114
Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 26 Ap il 2012, Commission . Ne he lands, case C‑508/10, pa a. 66, o
which: “ he p incipal pu pose o ha di ec i e [2003/109] is he in eg a ion o hi d-coun y na ionals who
a e se led on a long- e m basis in he Membe S a es”.
115
Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 18 Oc obe 2012, Singh, case C‑502/10, pa a. 46: “i is he du a ion o he
legal and con inuous esidence o 5 yea s which shows ha he pe son conce ned has pu down oo s in he
coun y”. Simila ly, judgmen o 20 Janua y 2022, ZK (Loss o long- e m esiden s a us), case C-432/20,
in which he Cou o Jus ice a i med ha once long- e m esiden s a us is acqui ed, he holde is no
equi ed o ha e his o he habi ual esidence o cen e o in e es s in he EU in o de o keep i .
116
Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 14 Janua y 2015, Demi ci e al., case C-171/13, pa a. 54, whe e he Cou
s a ed ha “ he acquisi ion o he na ionali y o he hos Membe S a e ep esen s, in p inciple, he mos
accomplished le el o in eg a ion”; and G and Chambe , judgmen o 14 No embe 2017, Lounes, case C-
165/16, pa a. 58, whe e i ei e a ed ha na u alisa ion means “ o become mo e deeply in eg a ed in he
socie y o ha S a e”. Fo a sound analysis, e e o A.
D
I
S
TASI
, Ci adinanza e al i s a us pe sonali nello
spazio eu opeo dei di i i ondamen ali: a p oposi o dell’implemen azione della di e i a 2003/109 ela i a
ai ci adini di paesi e zi che siano soggio nan i di lungo pe iodo, in M.
C.
B
ARUFFI
,
I.
Q
UADRANTI
(a cu a
di), Libe a ci colazione e di i i dei ci adini eu opei, Napoli, 2012, p. 31.
117
A . 11(4) o Council Di ec i e 2003/109/EC, ci .
118
Cou o Jus ice, G and Chambe , judgmen o 24 Ap il 2011, Kambe aj, case C-571/10, pa as 90-92.
On disc e iona y powe s enjoyed by he Membe S a es o de e mine he igh s associa ed o TCN legal
esidence in he EU, see A.
A
DINOLFI
, La ci colazione a gli S a i memb i dell’Unione degli s anie i in
condizione egola e, in G.
C
AGGIANO
(a cu a di), I pe co si giu idici pe l’in eg azione, ci ., p. 137.
119
Ac ion Plan 2021-2027, p. 5. Fo a c i ical app aisal, K.
D
E
V
RIES
, Towa ds In eg a ion and Equali y
o Thi d Coun y Na ionals? Re lec ions on Kambe aj, in Eu opean Law Re iew, 2013, p. 248.
120
S.
C
ARRERA
,
L.
V
OSYLIŪTĖ
,
Z.
V
ANKOVA
,
N.
L
AURENTSYEVA
,
M.
F
ERNANDES
,
J.
D
ENNISON
,
J.
G
UERIN
,
The Cos o Non-Eu ope in he A ea o Legal Mig a ion, CEPS Pape s in Libe y and Secu i y in Eu ope,
No. 2019-01, Ma ch 2019. See also A.
D
I
P
ASCALE
, L’accesso al me ca o del la o o, in G.
C
AGGIANO
(a
cu a di), I pe co si giu idici pe l’in eg azione, ci ., p. 585.
121
See, o ins ance, OECD/EU, Se ling in 2018: Indica o s o Immig an In eg a ion, Pa is, 2018. Re e
also o C.
N
AVARRA
,
M.
F
ERNANDES
, S udy on legal mig a ion policy and law. Eu opean added alue
assessmen , Eu opean Pa liamen a y Resea ch Se ice, PE 694.211, Sep embe 2021.
122
This is exp essly o eseen in A . 3(2) o bo h Council Di ec i e 2000/43/EC, ci ., and Council Di ec i e
2000/78/EC, ci . Simila ly, Cou o Jus ice, G and Chambe , Kambe aj, ci ., pa a. 49. Fo a c i ical eading,
E.
B
RIBOSIA
, Les poli iques d’in ég a ion de l’Union eu opéenne e des É a s Memb es à l’ép eu e du
Daniela Vi iello
167
indi idual igh s de i ing om legal esidence
123
(o legal p esence)
124
, bu does no apply
o na ional ules on TCN en y and s ay.
125
As a esul , di e en ial ea men based on he
“immig a ion s a us” may be compa ible wi h he gene al non-disc imina ion clause,
since his clause does no a ec he condi ions needed o ob ain a ce ain s a us.
126
This
eading has been upheld by he
Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s
, acco ding o which he
decision o emig a e “is subjec o an elemen o choice”,
127
which ende s i incompa able
wi h he immu able cha ac e is ics o he pe son, such as ace and e hnic o igin.
128
A hi d consequence o he EU minimalis app oach o non-disc imina ion owa ds
TCNs is hus linked o he issue o compa abili y. Di icul ies in es ablishing a alid
compa a o may complica e de ec ing disc imina ion agains TCNs, namely when a
compa a o o assess an un a ou able g oup- ela ed ea men is absen o e y abs ac
and gene al.
129
The di e en ia ion among di e en g oups o mig an s, especially when
jus i ied on he basis o he solidi y and du a ion o he “ ies”,
130
has also been accep ed
p incipe de non-disc imina ion, in Y.
P
ASCOUAU
,
T.
S
TRIK
(eds.), Which In eg a ion Policies o Mig an s?
In e ac ion be ween he EU and i s Membe S a es, Nijmegen, 2012, p. 64.
123
Cou o Jus ice, G and Chambe , Kambe aj, ci ., pa as 76-81.
124
Cou o Jus ice, G and Chambe , judgmen o 16 No embe 2021, Commission . Hunga y
(Inc imina ion de l’aide aux demandeu s d’asile), case C-821/19, pa as 136-137, on he igh o emain
pending s a us de e mina ion p ocedu es o asylum seeke s.
125
See, e.g., Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s, judgmen o 30 No embe 2021, applica ion no. 40240/19,
A ci . Denma k, on p opo ionali y o a pe manen e-en y ban issued o a well-se led mig an o se ious
d ug o ences. The Cou did no check he p opo ionali y o he pe manen e-en y ban agains he solidi y
o he applican ’s “ ies” wi h he hos coun y, because – con a y o i s consolida e case law (see, e.g.,
G and Chambe , judgmen o 23 June 2008, applica ion no. 1638/03, Maslo . Aus ia) – his decision
conce ned e-en y.
126
I is wo h ecalling, hough, ha in he opinion o Ad oca e Gene al E.
S
HARPSTON
,
deli e ed on 10
Decembe 2009, in he case C-578/08, Chak oun, pa as 40-43, a Du ch law, c ea ing double s anda d o
amily euni ica ion based on whe he he amily ie a ose be o e he sponso ’s en y in he Ne he lands,
was deemed incompa ible wi h he EU gene al p inciple o non-disc imina ion. In i s judgmen , he Cou
o Jus ice concluded seemingly (Chak oun, ci ., pa a. 64), bu wi hou men ioning he p inciple o non-
disc imina ion. Compa e wi h Cou o jus ice, G and Chambe , judgemen 25 July 2008, Blaise Bahe en
Me ock, case C-127/08, pa a. 58.
127
Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s, Plena y, judgmen o 28 May 1985, applica ion no. 9214/80 and 2
o he s, Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali . he Uni ed Kingdom, pa as 85-86, and judgmen o 27
No embe 2011, applica ion no. 56328/07, Bah . he Uni ed Kingdom, pa a. 47. See also he decision o
15 Sep embe 2015, applica ion no. 10154/04, Bonge . he Ne he lands, whe e, by decla ing inadmissible
he case o a s a eless who had been e used esidence pe mi o many yea s, he Eu opean Cou o Human
Righ s con i med he wide ma gin o app ecia ion le o s a e au ho i ies in he de e mina ion o immig an
legal s a us. Fo a commen , M.-B. D
EMBOUR
, When Humans Become Mig an s. S udy o he Eu opean
Cou o Human Righ s wi h an In e -Ame ican Coun e poin , Ox o d, 2015, p. 442.
128
See he landma k decision by he UK Sup eme Cou , Taiwo Olaigbe and Onu Akwiwu) [2016]
UKSC 31, on appeal om [2014] EWCA Ci 279, in which i s a ed ha mis ea men o employees
because o hei immig a ion s a us does no amoun o di ec disc imina ion because mig a ion canno be
equa ed o a p o ec ed cha ac e is ic unde he UK Equali y Ac .
129
On “ ela edness” o un a o able ea men and g oup membe ship, see Cou o Jus ice, G and Chambe ,
CHEZ, ci ., and Fe yn, ci . Fo u he eading, M.-B. D
EMBOUR
, S ill Silencing he Racism Su e ed by
Mig an s…, in Eu opean Jou nal o Mig a ion and Law, 2009, p. 221.
130
See, o ins ance, A . 17 o Council Di ec i e 2003/86/EC, ci ., equi ing a case-by-case assessmen o
he du a ion and solidi y o amily, cul u al and social ies wi h he hos coun y when deciding on TCN
emo al.

In Sea ch o he Legal Bounda ies o an “Open Socie y”
168
www. sjeu os udies.eu
by he S asbou g Cou , al hough a gene al and s able end canno be deduced om i s
case law.
131
O no less impo ance, since EU mig a ion law applies solely o TCNs, hei legal
condi ion is in p inciple incompa able wi h ha o he o he “ o eigne s” who a e ci izens
o he Membe S a es o TCN membe s o hei amilies.
132
I ’s ue ha he Cou o
Jus ice has a emp ed o ame he issue o compa abili y h ough he p opo ionali y lens.
Mo e p ecisely, i has used he ea men o EU ci izens as a compa a o o es ablish ha
TCNs’ ea men was “pe se disp opo iona e and liable o c ea e an obs acle o he
exe cise o he igh s con e ed by” EU law.
133
None heless, he Luxembou g Cou did
no enounce o d aw a line be ween he esidence condi ion o TCNs who ha e a amily
link wi h a Eu opean ci izen and ha o TCNs who ha e los such a link o easons which
a e no impu able o hem, emphasising ha any di e ence in ea men a ising om hese
wo si ua ions is no in b each o he p inciple o equali y as ensh ined in A . 20 o he
EU Cha e o Fundamen al Righ s (EUCFR).
134
A he same ime, he
Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s
has g an ed na ional au ho i ies
a wide ma gin o app ecia ion in ela ion o he p opo ionali y o TCNs’ di e en ial
ea men s unde A . 14 o he Eu opean Con en ion on Human Righ s (ECHR). Ye , i
has seemingly equi ed di e en ial ea men o be based on “ e y weigh y easons”
135
and emphasised he inc easing ele ance o some ac o s, such as he leng h o
esidence,
136
he peculia ulne abili y o he alien,
137
and he bea ing o ce ain igh s a
s ake.
138
131
Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s, Biao . Denma k, ci ., pa a 94. Simila ly, G and Chambe , judgmen
o 18 Oc obe 2006, applica ion no. 46410/99, Üne . he Ne he lands, pa a 58 and Maslo . Aus ia, ci .,
pa a 71. Con a, judgmen o 6 No embe 2012, applica ion no. 22341/09, Hode and Abdi . he Uni ed
Kingdom. See also, in a, n. 138. Fo an analysis o his case law, see E.
B
RIBOSIA
, Les poli iques
d’in ég a ion de l’Union eu opéenne, ci ., pp. 55-61.
132
This has been s a ed by he Cou o Jus ice, P & S, ci ., pa a. 43, on pe sonal scope o ci ic in eg a ion
obliga ions o long- e m esiden s pu suan o A . 11(1) o Council Di ec i e 2003/109, ci . Fo u he
eading, D.
T
HYM
, Towa ds a Con ex ual Concep ion o Social In eg a ion in EU Immig a ion Law.
Commen s on P & S and K & A, in Eu opean Jou nal o Mig a ion and Law, 2016, pp. 91-94.
133
Cou o Jus ice, Commission . Ne he lands, ci ., pa a. 78.
134
Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 2 Sep embe 2021, Belgian S a e (Righ o esidence in he e en o
domes ic iolence), case C-930/19. Fo u he eading, S.
R
OBIN
-O
LIVIER
, Du ma ché in é ieu au d oi
de l’immig a ion: Le long e a ide chemin du p incipe de non-disc imina ion à aison de la na ionali é, in
C.
L
EMAIRE
,
F.
M
ARTUCCI
(cu .), Lau ence Ido Libe Amico um. Concu ence e Eu ope, ol. II, Pa is,
2022, p. 455. Mo e gene ally, S.
M
ORANO
F
OADI
,
M.
M
ALENA
(eds.) In eg a ion o Thi d Coun y
Na ionals in he Eu opean Union: The Equali y Challenge, Chel enham-No hamp on, 2012.
135
Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s, judgmen o 23 May 1996, applica ion no. 17371/90, Gaygusuz .
Aus ia, pa a. 42.
136
Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s, Bah . he Uni ed Kingdom, ci ., pa a. 50.
137
Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s, G and Chambe , judgmen o 21 Janua y 2011, applica ion no.
30696/09, M.S.S. . Belgium and G eece, pa as 251-264.
138
Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s, Ponoma yo i e al. . Bulga ia, ci ., pa as 32-54, on exclusion om
seconda y educa ion o TCN mino s due o unpaid school ees. See also he judgmen o 8 Ap il 2014,
applica ion no. 17120/09, Dhahbi . I aly, pa a. 53, whe e he Eu opean Cou decla ed an I alian amily
allowance scheme, which ea ed TCNs less a ou ably han EU wo ke s, incompa ible wi h he combined
eading o A s 8 and 14 ECHR.
Daniela Vi iello
169
A any a e, he Eu opean Cou s’ a emp o cope wi h he EU’s minimalis app oach
o non-disc imina ion does no “escape he undamen al con adic ion, which lays a he
hea o libe al heo y, be ween he p eaching o uni e sali y and he p ac ice o
closu e”.
139
This con adic ion mi o s one o he key se backs connec ed o he “pa adox
o openness”:
140
he so called “neu ali y ap”.
141
By imposing he sac i ice o cul u al
di e si y in he name o a o malis ic unde s anding o aliens’ igh s,
142
neu ali y is
inhe en ly bound o a minimalis app oach o non-disc imina ion. This app oach
magni ies he ensions embedded in he legal design o he AFSJ, by expanding he gap
be ween equali y “on pape ” and non-disc imina ion “in p ac ice”, while minimising he
co ela ion be ween he success ul in eg a ion o TCNs and e ec i e immig a ion/asylum
policies.
6. The “e e close Union” and i s enemies: De ending openness in imes o c isis
Eu opean iden i y is a “weak iden i y” compa ed o na ional- ype iden i ies o ged by
his o ical belonging and wa s. Indeed, he poli ical p ojec o an “e e close Union” es s
on he capaci y o he EU legal sys em o c ea ing (and p ese ing) in e -indi idual
solida i y and in e -s a e esponsibili y-sha ing mechanisms: a goal ha becomes ha de
o achie e in imes o c isis.
143
Global insecu i y, alongside wi h he e amp o powe
poli ics and illibe alism, openly con es ing he EU sha ed alues and he ule o law,
144
139
M.-B.
D
EMBOUR
, Gaygusuz Re isi ed: The Limi s o he Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s’ Equali y
Agenda, in Human Righ s Law Re iew, 2012, p. 689.
140
J.
F.
H
OLLIFIELD
, The Eme ging Mig a ion S a e, ci ., p. 887: “Hence he libe al pa adox: he economic
logic o libe alism is one o openness, bu he poli ical and legal logic is one o closu e”.
141
N.
Z
EKIC
, An Open and Di e se Eu opean Union?, in Tilbu g Law Re iew, 2017, p. 260.
142
See, o ins ance, Cou o Jus ice, G and Chambe , judgmen o 14 Ma ch 2017, Achbi a, case C-157/15,
whe e he Cou held ha he p ohibi ion on wea ing an Islamic headsca , imposed on employees by a
p i a e employe , in o de o ensu e neu ali y owa ds cus ome s, did no cons i u e di ec disc imina ion
in ligh o Council Di ec i e 2000/78, ci . Simila ly, G and Chambe , judgmen o 15 July 2021, WABE,
joined cases C-804/18 e C-341/19. See E.
J
ACKSON
, Cases C‑804/18 and C‑341/19 – The False Neu ali y
o An i-In e sec ional In e p e a ion, in T ini y College Law Re iew Online, ini ycollegelaw e iew.o g;
E.
S
PAVENTA
, Wha is he Poin o Minimum Ha moniza ion o Fundamen al Righ s? Some Fu he
Re lec ions on he Achbi a Case, in EU law analysis, 21 Ma ch 2017, eulawanalysis.
143
Ac ion Plan 2016, pa a. 3. Fo u he eading, M.
I
GNATIEFF
,
S.
R
OCH
(eds.), Re hinking Open Socie y.
New Ad e sa ies and New Oppo uni ies, Budapes -New Yo k, 2018.
144
See, on he one hand, he open con es a ion o EU alues by he s.c. “illibe al democ acies” – Hunga y
and Poland – and, on he o he , he sel -legi ima ion o B exi ing Uni ed Kingdom in open opposi ion o
he poli ical p ojec o an “e e close Union”. On illibe alism and i s impac on he EU legal sys em, see
G.
DE
B
ÚRCA
, Poland and Hunga y’s EU membe ship: On no Con on ing Au ho i a ian Go e nmen s, in
In e na ional Jou nal o Cons i u ional Law, 2022; T.
D
RINÓCZI
,
A.
B
IEŃ
-K
ACAŁA
(eds.), Rule o Law,
Common Values, and Illibe al Cons i u ionalism. Poland and Hunga y wi hin he Eu opean Union,
Abingdon-New Yo k, 2021. On B exi and he “e e close Union”, see V.
M
ILLER
, “E e Close Union”
in he EU T ea ies and Cou o Jus ice Case Law – Resea ch B ie ing, House o Common Lib a y, London,
16 No embe 2015.
In Sea ch o he Legal Bounda ies o an “Open Socie y”
170
www. sjeu os udies.eu
ha e e oded he legal bounda ies o he Union as an open and plu alis poli y o he poin
ha p o ec ing openness seems o equi e e e highe le els o closu e.
145
This pa adox
146
– a ec ing many ma u e libe al democ acies a ound he wo ld – is
lucidly epi omised by he downwa d end o he Common Eu opean Asylum Sys em.
The CEAS was en isaged as he “ angua d o in e na ional p o ec ion” in he Wes e n
Wo ld – he mos ad anced p o ec ion sys em a g oup o S a es e e managed o ag ee
upon and o smoo hly implemen o some decades.
147
Al hough a ec ed by he
un esol ed con adic ions de i ing om he limi s o ha monisa ion and he ecou se o
mu ual us o igh s- es ic ing pu poses,
148
he es ablishmen o he CEAS has
indi ec ly con ibu ed o he s eamlining o na ional p ocesses o inclusion o he e ugee
popula ion, while aising awa eness on he s uc u al na u e o o ced mobili y.
149
None heless, he ou b eak o he so-called “ e ugee c isis” in 2015 led o he
p oli e a ion o na ional policies e-emphasising “ he impo ance o he elusi e na ional
bo de s o he mos ulne able g oup o he popula ion – he mig an s and esiden s
wi hou EU ci izenship”.
150
This igge ed he casualisa ion o asylum in Eu ope h ough
he adop ion o c isis-managemen ins umen s, ha ing he e ec o pos pone, dilu e o
deny access o igh s by mig an s holding a legal en i lemen o “ emain” on EU
e i o y.
151
The mas e ing o de e ence-d i en modes o mig a ion managemen a he
na ional le el has been linked o hype -selec i e
152
and secu i ised mig a ion policies a
145
See he B a isla a Decla a ion, adop ed a he In o mal Mee ing o 27 Heads o S a e o Go e nmen on
16 Sep embe 2016 in B a isla a and calling o a highe deg ee o closu e o s eng hen he “Secu i y
Union” and enhance in e nal openness.
146
On his pa adox, see D.
G
OODHART
, Solida i y, Di e si y and he Open Socie y, in M.
W
IND
-C
OWIE
,
B.
K
AROL
B
URKS
(eds.), The Open Socie y Canno Be Relied Upon o De end I sel ... Open Dialogue, London,
2011, p. 57.
147
E.
G
UILD
,
C.
C
OSTELLO
,
M.
G
ARLICK
,
V.
M
ORENO
-L
AX
,
S.
C
ARRERA
, Enhancing he Common
Eu opean Asylum Sys em and Al e na i es o Dublin. S udy eques ed by he LIBE Commi ee, Eu opean
Pa liamen , PE 519.234, July 2015.
148
V.
M
ORENO
-L
AX
, Mu ual (Dis-)T us in EU Mig a ion and Asylum Law: The Excep ionalisa ion o
Fundamen al Righ s, in S.
I
GLESIAS
S
ANCHEZ
,
M.
G
ONZALEZ
P
ASCUAL
(eds.), Fundamen al Righ s in he
EU A ea o F eedom, Secu i y and Jus ice, Camb idge, 2021, p. 77. On he issue o access o jus ice, see
C.
F
AVILLI
, The S anda d o Fundamen al Righ s P o ec ion in he Field o Asylum: The Case o he Righ
o an E ec i e Remedy be ween EU law and he I alian Cons i u ion, in Re iew o Eu opean Adminis a i e
Law, 2019, p. 167.
149
E.
T
SOURDI
, The Eme ging A chi ec u e o EU Asylum Policy: Insigh s in o he Adminis a i e
Go e nance o he Common Eu opean Asylum Sys em, in F.
B
IGNAMI
(ed.), EU Law in Populis Times:
C ises and P ospec s, Camb idge, 2020, p. 191.
150
D.
K
OCHENOV
,
M.
VAN DEN
B
RINK
, P e ending The e Is No Union: Non-De i a i e Quasi-Ci izenship
Righ s o Thi d-Coun y Na ionals in he EU, Wo king Pape s, Law 2015/07, Eu opean Uni e si y Ins i u e,
Flo ence, p. 23.
151
V.
M
ORENO
-L
AX
, Accessing Asylum in Eu ope: Ex a e i o ial Bo de Con ols and Re ugee Righ s
unde EU Law, Ox o d, 2017; T.
G
AMMELTOFT
-H
ANSEN
, Access o Asylum: In e na ional Re ugee Law
and he Globalisa ion o Mig a ion Con ol, Camb idge, 2011.
152
Commission S a Wo king Documen , Execu i e Summa y o he Fi ness Check on EU Legisla ion on
Legal Mig a ion, o 29 Ma ch 2019, SWD(2019) 1056 inal, p. 1, whe e hype -selec i e and ed-ca pe
policies o highly-skilled mig an s a e ad oca ed o eo ien EU mig a ion policy “ om se ing common
minimum s anda ds on igh s, admission and esidence condi ions o all hi d-coun y na ionals, o
a ac ing he hi d-coun y na ionals ha he EU economy ‘needs’ ”.
Daniela Vi iello
171
he EU le el,
153
de ac o equa ing he igh agains i egula mig a ion o he “wa on
e o ”,
154
while quali ying unau ho ised mo emen s o o ced mig an s and p ima acie
e ugees as a “hyb id h ea ”.
155
Acco dingly, in he wake o he s.c. 2015 e ugee c isis, he a i al o signi ican
numbe s o p ima acie e ugees has been p esen ed by EU ins i u ions no only as a h ea
o Eu opean secu i y, bu also as a “s ess es ” o he Union’s undamen al alues.
156
This a gumen – oo ed in he pe cep ion ha “mig a ion unde mines he ounda ions o
communi y and socie y”
157
and ha “(w)hile he igh o p o ec ion is no limi ed, he
capaci y o o e p o ec ion is” –
158
has led o asylum- es ic ing-policies, aimed a
ensu ing g ea e adminis a i e sus ainabili y.
The shi om he p o ec ion a ionale o he CEAS – g ounding on in e na ional
obliga ions and on b oad o mula ion o he igh o asylum in he EUCFR –
159
o a mo e
p agma ic and ealis ic unde s anding o in e na ional p o ec ion esponsibili ies, has
deeply a ec ed he ecep ion o his g oup o aliens.
160
The ocus on bo de managemen
conce ns
161
and he need o cu b asylum li iga ion ha e led o a gene alised p esump ion
153
On he nexus be ween na ional and EU’s de e ence-d i en modes o mig a ion managemen , see D.
V
ITIELLO
, Legal Na a i es o he EU Ex e nal Ac ion in he Field o Mig a ion and Asylum: F om he EU-
Tu key S a emen o he Mig a ion Pa ne ship F amewo k and Beyond, in V.
M
ITSILEGAS
,
V.
M
ORENO
-
L
AX
,
N.
V
AVOULA
(eds.), Secu i ising Asylum Flows. De lec ion, C iminalisa ion and Challenges o
Human Righ s, Leiden-Bos on, 2020, p. 145.
154
This equa ion seems embedded in o he ecou se o a mili a y ool o an i-smuggling pu poses wi hin
he amewo k o he Ope a ion Sophia, i s , and I ini, a e . Fo u he eading, C.
K
IRTZMAN
, SOPHIA
o IRINI: A Shi in EU Medi e anean Ope a ions, in A Pa h o Eu ope, 5 No embe 2020; S.
P
EERS
, The
EU’s Planned Wa on Smuggle s, in S a ewa ch.o g, May 2015; I.
I
NGRAVALLO
, L’ope azione mili a e
EUNAVFOR MED, in Sud in Eu opa, se emb e 2015 (online).
155
P oposal o a Council Decision, on p o isional eme gency measu es o he bene i o La ia, Li huania
and Poland, o 1
Decembe 2021, COM(2021) 752 inal, eci al 2, quali ying he “ins umen alisa ion” o
mass displacemen by hi d coun ies o ansi as a “hyb id h ea ” esul ing in an unp eceden ed inc ease
in i egula bo de c ossings. Con a, see eci al 26 o Regula ion (EU) 2016/399 o he Eu opean
Pa liamen and o he Council, on a Union Code on he ules go e ning he mo emen o pe sons ac oss
bo de s (Schengen Bo de s Code), o 9 Ma ch 2016, in OJ L77, 23 Ma ch 2016, pp. 1-52, acco ding o
which: “Mig a ion and he c ossing o he ex e nal bo de s by a la ge numbe o TCNs should no , pe se,
be conside ed o be a h ea o public policy o in e nal secu i y”. On he “ins umen alisa ion” o mig an s,
see S.
M
ARINAI
, L’Unione eu opea isponde alla s umen alizzazione dei mig an i: ma a quale p ezzo?, in
ADiM Blog, Decembe 2021.
156
No e om he P esidency o he Pe manen Rep esen a i es Commi ee/Council o he Eu opean Union,
P esidency non-pape o he Council (Gene al A ai s) on 24 May 2016 – Rule o law dialogue, o 13 May
2016, doc. 8774/16.
157
Ibid., p. 7.
158
Ibidem.
159
M.-T.
G
IL
-B
AZO
, The Cha e o Fundamen al Righ s o he Eu opean Union and he Righ o be
G an ed Asylum in he Union’s Law, in Re ugee Su ey Qua e ly, 2008, p. 46. On he ele ance o he
EUCFR o TCN in eg a ion, see amplius F.
I
PPOLITO
, La Ca a dei di i i ondamen ali quale s umen o
pe l’in eg azione dei ci adini comuni a i ed ex acomuni a i: un p imo bilancio, in G.
C
AGGIANO
(a cu a
di), I pe co si giu idici pe l’in eg azione, ci ., p. 91.
160
See, e.g., Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s, G and Chambe , M.S.S. . Belgium and G eece, ci ., pa as
251-264.
161
On he inc easing ele ance o conce ns ela ing o adminis a i e sus ainabili y o ex e nal bo de
managemen in S asbou g case law on aliens’ igh s, see Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s, G and
Chambe , judgmen o 13 Feb ua y 2020, applica ions nos. 8675/15 and 8697/15, N.D. and N.T. . Spain,
pa a. 231. This case law has been consolida ed and expanded in he judgmen o 5 Ap il 2022, applica ion
In Sea ch o he Legal Bounda ies o an “Open Socie y”
178
www. sjeu os udies.eu
Such a decision is ema kable, because i opens a window o oppo uni y o hink
ou side he box in he ecas o asylum/mig a ion policies, disp o ing all he ac o s (e.g.
he numbe s, he pull ac o a gumen , he socio-economic bu den, e c.), which ha e been
aised in he pas decades o back he s.c. “coope a i e con ainmen ” app oach.
199
I is
uncon en ional because i elinks asylum o mobili y igh s, bols e ing he elaxa ion o
bo de con ols and he non-penalisa ion o unau ho ised c ossings o he ex e nal bo de s
o pu poses o access o p o ec ion,
200
while allowing Uk ainian e ugees ee ci cula ion
ac oss Schengen in e nal bo de s o spon aneously eloca e o he Membe S a e o hei
choice.
201
F om he iewpoin o immig an in eg a ion, he implemen a ion o he decision o
welcome Uk ainian e ugees becomes he pe ec es bed o “a mo e igo ous in eg a ion
policy” a he EU le el. I s ing edien s a e he dismissal o he consolida ed minimalis
app oach o non-disc imina ion o ully emb ace he idea ha p ese ing plu alism and
openness implies a mo e inclusi e agenda on social cohesion and cul u al in eg a ion.
Such a shi owa ds a mo e c edible commi men o “in eg a ion- h ough-di e si y” was
al eady ad oca ed by he Commission p io o he Uk aine e ugee c isis, wi hin he
Ac ion Plan on In eg a ion and Inclusion 2021-2027,
202
and has none heless gained new
momen um due o he u gen need o p o ide in eg a ion means o he o e wo million
people – he as majo i y o whom a e mino s and women – who ha e al eady egis e ed
o p o ec ion in he EU.
203
The co e o he ambi ious plan o he ecep ion and in eg a ion o Uk ainian e ugees
is ep esen ed by a se o measu es which include he ollowing: Fi s , he es ablishmen
o a cen alised solida i y pla o m,
204
allowing exchange o eal- ime in o ma ion on
egis e ed pe sons o acili a e hei access o igh s in all Membe S a es, while a oiding
199
V.
M
ORENO
-L
AX
,
J.
A
LLSOPP
,
E.
T
SOURDI
,
Ph.
D
E
B
RUYCKER
, The EU App oach on Mig a ion in he
Medi e anean. S udy eques ed by he LIBE Commi ee, Eu opean Pa liamen , PE 694.413, June 2021, p.
46.
200
Communica ion om he Commission, P o iding ope a ional guidelines o ex e nal bo de
managemen o acili a e bo de c ossings a he EU-Uk aine bo de s, C(2022) 1404, in OJ C104I, 4 Ma ch
2022, pp. 1-6.
201
On he se back o he a ionale o he CEAS – as an asylum sys em p emised upon a non-mobili y egime
– see he S a emen on non-applica ion o A . 11 o Council Di ec i e 2001/55/EC, ci ., a ached o Council
Implemen ing Decision 2022/382, ci ., h ough which he Membe S a es inciden ally enounced o
implemen ake-back p ocedu es in he e en o p o ec ion holde s’ seconda y mo emen s. Fo u he
eading, D.
V
ITIELLO
, The Nansen Passpo and he EU Tempo a y P o ec ion Di ec i e: Re lec ions on
Solida i y, Mobili y Righ s and he Fu u e o Asylum in Eu ope, in Eu opean Pape s, 2022, n. 7, p. 15.
202
See sup a, n. 43. Mo e gene ally, o he ela ion be ween he Re ugee Con en ion and empo a y
p o ec ion in he EU, see F.
M
UNARI
, Lo s a us di i ugia o e di ichieden e p o ezione empo anea. La
isione eu opea del “di i o di Gine a”, in S.
A
MADEO
,
F.
S
PITALERI
(a cu a di), Le ga anzie ondamen ali
dell’immig a o in Eu opa, To ino, 2015, p. 47.
203
EU Agency o Asylum, 2.3 million Uk ainians ha e egis e ed o p o ec ion in he EU, P ess Release
o 27 Ap il 2022.
204
Eu opean Commission, Solida i y wi h Uk aine: Commission launches an EU pla o m o egis a ion
o people, P ess Release o 31 May 2022, MEX/22/3384.

Daniela Vi iello
179
possible abuses. Second, he adop ion o a “whole-o -socie y app oach”
205
o e ugee
ecep ion and in eg a ion, lessening he ela ed esponsibili y on Membe S a es by
p omo ing p i a e solida i y and sponso ship
206
– a goal which has al eady been se ou in
he New Pac
207
and ope a ionalised h ough he enewal o he Eu opean Pa ne ship on
In eg a ion.
208
Thi d, a di e si ied po olio o unding oppo uni ies, made immedia ely
a ailable o na ional and egional au ho i ies and allowing o lexible access o unding
o all so s o “ope a ions add essing he mig a o y challenges as a esul o he mili a y
agg ession by he Russian Fede a ion”,
209
including o hose ca ego ies o e ugees o
whom he Membe S a es may ex end o ms o “adequa e p o ec ion” on a disc e iona y
basis.
210
On op o hese sho - e m esponses o he c isis, he Commission has en isaged
s uc u al e o ms o EU policy on legal mig a ion, including speci ic ac ions o acili a e
in eg a ion o hose leeing Russia’s in asion o Uk aine.
211
The new package mo es om
he assump ion ha “legal mig a ion has a posi i e impac all ound”, which should be
boos ed by “imp o ing igh s o esiden s and hei amily membe s”, while a ac ing
new alen s.
212
I is o med by wo main pilla s: a legisla i e pilla , including wo p oposals
o he ecas o he Single Pe mi Di ec i e
213
and he Long-Te m Residence Di ec i e,
214
and an ope a ional pilla , pu ing o wa d wo new ins umen s o he a ac ion o skills
205
On his app oach, which gained momen um in he a e ma h o he UN Global Compac o Mig a ion,
see J.
K.
A
PPLEBY
, Implemen a ion o he Global Compac on Sa e, O de ly, and Regula Mig a ion: A
Whole-o -Socie y App oach, in Jou nal on Mig a ion and Human Secu i y, 2020, p. 214.
206
Communica ion om he Commission o he Eu opean Pa liamen , he Council, he Eu opean Economic
and Social Commi ee and he Commi ee o he Regions, Eu opean solida i y wi h e ugees and hose
leeing wa in Uk aine, o 8 Ma ch 2022, COM(2022) 107 inal, p. 8.
207
New Pac , pa a. 6.6.
208
The Eu opean Pa ne ship on In eg a ion has been es ablished in 2017 by he Commission wi h socio-
economic pa ne s in many Membe S a es, wi h he aim o os e ing a “whole-o -socie y app oach” o
labou ma ke in eg a ion o e ugees. I was elaunched h ough he Join S a emen by he Eu opean
Commission and Economic and Social Pa ne s, Renewal o he Eu opean Pa ne ship o In eg a ion,
o e ing oppo uni ies o e ugees o in eg a e in he Eu opean labou ma ke , P ess Release o 7
Sep embe 2020, IP/20/1561.
209
Regula ion (EU) 2022/562 o he Eu opean Pa liamen and o he Council, amending Regula ions (EU)
No 1303/2013 and (EU) No 223/2014 as ega ds Cohesion’s Ac ion o Re ugees in Eu ope (CARE), o 6
Ap il 2022, in OJ L109, 8 Ap il 2022, pp. 1-5.
210
Council Implemen ing Decision 2022/382, ci ., A . 2(3).
211
Re e o he Pilo EU Talen Pool o people leeing he Russian wa o agg ession agains Uk aine,
illus a ed in he Communica ion om he Commission o he Eu opean Pa liamen , he Council, he
Eu opean Economic and Social Commi ee and he Commi ee o he Regions, A ac ing skills and alen
o he EU, o 27 Ap il 2022, COM(2022) 657 inal, pa a. 3.2.
212
Eu opean Commission, Legal mig a ion: A ac ing skills and alen o he EU, P ess Release o 27 Ap il
2022, IP/22/2654.
213
P oposal o a Di ec i e o he Eu opean Pa liamen and o he Council, on a single applica ion
p ocedu e o a single pe mi o hi d-coun y na ionals o eside and wo k in he e i o y o a Membe
S a e and on a common se o igh s o hi d-coun y wo ke s legally esiding in a Membe S a e ( ecas ),
o 27 Ap il 2022, COM(2022) 655 inal.
214
P oposal o a Di ec i e o he Eu opean Pa liamen and o he Council, conce ning he s a us o hi d-
coun y na ionals who a e long- e m esiden s ( ecas ), o 27 Ap il 2022, COM(2022) 650 inal. Fo a i s
app aisal, see S.
P
EERS
, Long- e m esiden non-EU ci izens: The EU Commission’s new p oposal (pa 1),
in EU Law Analysis, 13 May 2022, eulawanalysis.
In Sea ch o he Legal Bounda ies o an “Open Socie y”
180
www. sjeu os udies.eu
and alen : he Talen Pa ne ships wi h hi d coun ies and he EU Talen Pool, o be e
ma ch EU employe s wi h he alen s hey need.
215
The combined eading o hese p oposals signals a di e en a i ude owa ds
immig an in eg a ion in he EU, enhancing immig an con ibu ion o he demog aphic,
socie al and economic wellbeing o he hos coun y. Thus, e en i he e is a widesp ead
pe cep ion ha he measu es adop ed o Uk ainian e ugees a e likely o emain a lex
specialis wi h no p ospec s o gene alisa ion, i is equally undeniable ha he Uk aine
e ugee c isis has spa ked new p ojec s o du able change in he managemen o mass
displacemen wi hin he EU. E en mo e impo an ly, i has showed ha he only possible
al e na i e o his change is abdica ing he openness and plu alism o Eu opean socie ies
in a ou o a u he (and illuso y) secu i isa ion o he AFSJ and he CEAS.
216
The e o e, a mo e igo ous app oach o immig an in eg a ion, e ou ing he EU social
inclusion agenda o he goal o “social inclusion o all”, seems he only possible way o
add ess he challenges o mass displacemen consis en ly wi h he heo e ical and legal
p emises o a Eu opean open socie y. The a ainmen o his goal could be helped by some
key ea u es o he cu en “c isis”, con e ging a ound a concep ion o in eg a ion as a
ela ional p ocess in ol ing no only he mig an and he hos communi y, bu also he
coun y o o igin.
217
Indeed, since people leeing Uk aine ha e been g an ed immedia e
p o ec ion igge ing mobili y igh s, o a leas enjoy ee ci cula ion as a esul o isa
wai e commi men s (in he case o Uk ainian na ionals), hey a e in p inciple ee o go
back and o h be ween hei coun y o o igin and he hos Membe S a e, becoming
“a chi ec s o poli ical epai and econs i u ion back home and ab oad”.
218
Keeping he p omise o “ iple wins” o he hos communi ies, he home socie y and
he e ugees hemsel es would howe e equi e abandoning he old concep ion o
ansna ional mig a ion embedded in empo a y labou mig a ion schemes (such as he
Gas a bei e p og amm de eloped in Ge many om he 1960’s onwa ds),
219
while
mi iga ing he agmen a ion o ci cula mig a ion schemes wi hin he EU.
220
This en ails i s and o emos he eleasing o immig an and e ugee “in eg a ion
po en ial”, by aking hei igh s se iously ins ead o using in eg a ion p ospec s as an
215
See sup a, n. 211, pa a. 3.
216
K.
F.
Z
IMMERMANN
, Re ugee and Mig an Labo Ma ke In eg a ion: Eu ope in Need o a New Policy
Agenda, in R.
B
AUBÖCK
,
M.
T
RIPKOVIC
(eds.), The In eg a ion o Mig an s and Re ugees. An EUI Fo um
on Mig a ion, Ci izenship and Demog aphy, Eu opean Uni e si y Ins i u e, Flo ence, 2017, p. 88.
217
This concep ion o in eg a ion was i s launched in he Communica ion om he Commission,
Eu opean Agenda o he In eg a ion o Thi d-Coun y Na ionals, ci ., emphasising he ole o coun ies o
o igin in making in eg a ion a way o ealising he po en ial o mig a ion. Then, i was de ailed in he
Commission Final Repo , Eu opean Modules on Mig an In eg a ion, Feb ua y 2014, iden i ying h ee
a eas o u he implemen a ion: educa ion/language, ecep i e hos communi ies, mig an agency.
218
A.
V
ASANTHAKUMAR
, How Re ugees S eng hen Democ acy and Solida i y, in The New S a emen , 18
Ma ch 2022.
219
The consequences o his p og amme we e epi omised by he amous apho ism by he Swiss w i e Max
F isch (1965): “Wi ie en A bei sk ä e, und es kamen Menschen” (“we called o wo ke s and human
beings a i ed”).
220
See Z.
V
ANKOVA
, Ci cula Mig a ion and he Righ s o Mig an Wo ke s in Cen al and Eas e n
Eu ope. The EU P omise o a T iple Win Solu ion, Cham, 2020.
Daniela Vi iello
181
indica o o (un)sui abili y o admission h ough legal pa hways.
221
Taking immig an
and e ugee igh s se iously also means ecognising hei cul u al iden i y and hei igh
o di e si y, as a necessa y p emise o acili a e hei se lemen and de elop hei agency.
This was acknowledged by he Eu opean Pa liamen back in 2009, when i adop ed a
esolu ion suppo ing mig an s’ cul u al in eg a ion as a p ocess based on in e -cul u al
and in e - ai h dialogues and he encoun e be ween he cul u es o bo h he coun y o
o igin and he hos coun y.
222
This goal was es a ed and expanded in he a e ma h o he
2015 e ugee c isis, when he Pa liamen called o immig an ne wo ks’ in ol emen in
local cul u al li e and ull pa icipa ion in cul u al decisions, as a means o p omo e
“ espec be ween cul u es, inc eases di e si y and espec o democ acy, libe y, human
igh s as well as ole ance o uni e sal and cul u e speci ic alues”.
223
F om his
pe spec i e, educa ion may ha e “a double ecip ocal e ec ”, meaning ha S a es should
p o ide means o educa ion o mig an s as well as educa ing hos communi ies in he
alue o cul u al di e si y.
224
The second majo challenge needing o be add essed o make immig an and e ugee
in eg a ion a “ iple win” solu ion is empowe ing communi ies. The esponse o he
Uk aine e ugee c isis clea ly showed ha in e -indi idual solida i y is a aluable asse
o bo h he coun ies o esidence and o o igin, signi ican ly con ibu ing o he
econs uc ion and esilience o ne wo ks o belongings.
225
I also con i med he u gency
o de elop an EU-wide in eg a ion p og amme, channelling his solida i y owa ds he
cons uc ion o open, plu alis ic and inclusi e socie ies,
226
while educing he
agmen a ion de i ing om he p oli e a ion o domes ic policy schemes.
227
221
This op ion has been de eloped wi hin he EU Rese lemen F amewo k p oposal (P oposal o a
Regula ion o he Eu opean Pa liamen and o he Council, es ablishing a Union Rese lemen F amewo k
and amending Regula ion (EU) No 516/2014 o he Eu opean Pa liamen and he Council, o 13 July 2016,
COM(2016) 468 inal), allowing he Membe S a es o ame as a c i e ion o as - acking TCN admission
hei “social o cul u al links, o o he cha ac e is ics ha can acili a e in eg a ion” (A . 10(1)(b) o he
s.c. “o dina y p ocedu e o ese lemen ”). As poin ed ou by K. B
AMBERG
, The EU Rese lemen
F amewo k: F om a Humani a ian Pa hway o a Mig a ion Managemen Tool? Discussion Pape ,
Eu opean Policy Cen e, 26 June 2018, p. 8, by adop ing his c i e ion “ he EU would be in a posi ion o
condi ion he access o p o ec ion (…) on in eg a ion po en ial. Including his as a c i e ion could gi e
p e e ence o ce ain indi iduals o e some o he mos ulne able in ese lemen p ocessing, especially
since i is no clea ly de ined in he Commission p oposal how his would ela e o ulne abili y and o he
eligibili y c i e ia”.
222
Eu opean Pa liamen Resolu ion, on a Common Immig a ion Policy o Eu ope: P inciples, ac ions and
ools, o 22 Ap il 2009, 2008/2331(INI), P6_TA(2009)0257, pa a. 22.
223
Eu opean Pa liamen Resolu ion, on he ole o in e cul u al dialogue, cul u al di e si y and educa ion
in p omo ing EU undamen al alues, o 19 Janua y 2016, 2015/2139(INI), P8 TA(2016)0005, pa a. 6.
224
ICMC, Commen s on he EU Ac ion Plan on he in eg a ion o hi d coun y na ionals, 9 Feb ua y 2017,
www.eu odiaconia.o g.
225
On he alue and po en ial o ci ic solida i y, see S.
S
ONG
, Th ee Models o Ci ic Solida i y, in R. M.
S
MITH
(ed.), Ci izenship, Bo de s, and Human Needs, Philadelphia, 2011, p. 192.
226
An in e es ing pilo p ojec o such an EU-wide ci ic in eg a ion p og amme, based on pee - o-pee
dialogues, has been ca ied ou in he amewo k o he EU- unded p ojec “Eu o egions, Mig a ion and
In eg a ion” (EUMINT), o which see R. M
EDDA
-W
INDISCHER
,
A.
C
ARLÀ
, Eu opean Ci ic In eg a ion
and Common Values: The Expe ience o a Boa d Game, in Peace Human Righ s Go e nance, 2021, p. 9.
227
On he agmen a ion o domes ic schemes, see (among many), Cen e o S a egy and E alua ion
Se ices, S udy on P ac ices o In eg a ion o Thi d-Coun y Na ionals a Local and Regional Le el in he
In Sea ch o he Legal Bounda ies o an “Open Socie y”
182
www. sjeu os udies.eu
Thus, a mo e igo ous app oach o immig an in eg a ion a he EU le el should
imp o e complemen a i y among all in eg a ion- ela ed ac ion ields (including, bu no
limi ed o, educa ion, social p o ec ion, housing, employmen ).
228
In addi ion, i should
suppo ac i e local mig a ion policies and expand “ he key ole played by local and
egional au ho i ies, ade unions, mig an o ganisa ions, p o essional ede a ions and
associa ions in he in eg a ion o mig an s”,
229
by means o di ec inancial suppo o
p i a e en i ies and diaspo as as well.
230
The design o his EU-wide ci ic in eg a ion
p og amme may complemen he Commission’s commi men o se up a “Eu opean
model” o communi y sponso ship – as es ablished in he New Pac –
231
hus s epping up
he Eu opean policy on legal pa hways, while easing access in case o spon aneous a i al
o e ugees and o ced mig an s.
The las ing edien o a “ iple win” s a egy in immig an and e ugee in eg a ion in
Eu ope is linked o he lexibili y o he legal amewo k go e ning i . A oiding a “one
size i s all” app oach o in eg a ion, while adop ing an EU-sha ed e e ence amewo k
o domes ic ini ia i es, seems key o os e he engagemen o ci ies and subu bs, which
a e he p ime loci o immig an and e ugee in eg a ion and hose mos exposed o he
consequences o i s ailu e.
232
In a wo ld in which a la ge majo i y o he popula ion li es
in u ban a eas, empowe ing ci ies
233
means boos ing u ban di e si y, in ended as “a
con ex o social, economic, cul u al and poli ical ela ions”, which akes o m “ ia
exchanges a a local scale – o example, in a neighbou hood – among ansna ional
Eu opean Union, Eu opean Union, Ap il 2013; EU Commi ee o he Regions, Regula o y F amewo k on
Employmen and Funding o Mig a ion and In eg a ion Policies in he EU, Eu opean Union, 2016.
228
Communica ion om he Commission, on Guidance o access o he labou ma ke , oca ional
educa ion and aining and adul lea ning o people leeing Russia’s wa o agg ession agains Uk aine,
o 14 June 2022, C(2022) 4050 inal, p. 3.
229
Eu opean Pa liamen Resolu ion, on a Common Immig a ion Policy o Eu ope, ci ., pa a. 28. Simila ly,
see Council o Eu ope, Pa liamen a y Assembly Resolu ion, on educa ional and cul u al ne wo ks o
mig an s and diaspo a communi ies, o 23 June 2016, 2124(2016).
230
Di ec ans e o EU unds o p i a e en i ies migh also help mi iga e he impac o he ule o law
condi ionali y on communi ies engaged in solida i y and p o-immig an / e ugee ac ions, which could isk
being indi ec ly penalised in case o suspensions o cu -o s o EU unds o hei Membe S a e o
na ionali y. On he ule o law condi ionali y, see Regula ion (EU, Eu a om) 2020/2092 o he Eu opean
Pa liamen and o he Council, on a gene al egime o condi ionali y o he p o ec ion o he Union budge ,
o 16 Decembe 2020, in OJ L433I, 22 Decembe 2020, pp. 1-10. Fo u he eading, J.
Ł
ACNY
, The Rule
o Law Condi ionali y Unde Regula ion No 2092/2020. Is i all Abou he Money?, in Hague Jou nal on
he Rule o Law, 2021, p. 79.
231
New Pac , pa a. 6.6. See also Commission Recommenda ion, on legal pa hways o p o ec ion in he EU:
p omo ing ese lemen , humani a ian admission and o he complemen a y pa hways, o 23 Sep embe
2020, C(2020) 6467 inal. See N.
F.
T
AN
, Communi y Sponso ship, he Pac and he Compac : Towa ds
P o ec ion P inciples, in ASILE Fo um on he new EU Pac on Mig a ion and Asylum in ligh o he UN
GCR, Sep embe 2020, asilep ojec .eu. In addi ion, o an analysis o p os and cons o a ese lemen scheme
based on he c i e ion o ulne abili y, see M. S
AVINO
, Re ashioning Rese lemen : om Bo de
Ex e naliza ion o Legal Pa hways o Asylum, in S. C
ARRERA
,
L.
DEN
H
ERTOG
,
M.
P
ANIZZON
,
D.
K
OSTAKOPOULOU
(eds.), EU Ex e nal Mig a ion Policies in an E a o Global Mobili ies: In e sec ing
Policy Uni e ses, Leiden-Bos on, 2018, p. 81.
232
J.
V
IGNON
(ed.), Mig a ions, asile, mobili é e in ég a ion en Eu ope: indissociables aleu s communes,
Ins i u Jacques Delo s, 2021, p. 27.
233
On ci ies’ empowe men in Eu ope, e e o he Eu opean Commi ee o he Regions’ in eg a ion
ini ia i e “Ci ies and Regions o In eg a ion o Mig an s”, co .eu opa.eu.
Daniela Vi iello
183
ne wo ks o mig an s, (…) s a e au ho i ies and globalized eli es”.
234
I is h ough hese
exchanges ha local ac o s and discou se may ac i a e ans o ma i e dynamics, capable
o o e coming s uc u al hu dles o in eg a ion, whe he hey depend on he ins i u ional
amewo k o on socio-economic condi ions.
235
8. S eamlining he New Pac on Mig a ion and Asylum o he goal o immig an
in eg a ion
Immig an in eg a ion is he ob ious elephan in he oom o EU mig a ion and asylum
policy e o m. None heless, i s ill seems o be he missing piece in he ecas o he
go e nance o human mobili y heading owa ds he Eu opean Union. I s cen ali y has
long been displaced by mains eam na a i es building upon he secu i y-ex e nalisa ion
con inuum,
236
s eng hening he exclusiona y unc ion o ex e nal bo de s o he poin o
impac ing on he eedom o mo emen e en o EU ci izens and pe manen esiden s in
he Union.
237
The ma ginalisa ion o he EU in eg a ion policy is o en connec ed o he limi s o EU
compe ence in his ealm, impeding he adop ion o ha monising ac s.
238
Howe e , his
a gumen unde es ima es he possibili y o a igo ous sup ana ional app oach owa ds
immig an in eg a ion o be achie ed h ough al e na i e means, which ha e been
iden i ied and analysed in he p e ious pa ag aphs.
Fi s , i he commi men o adjus he EU immig an in eg a ion policy “ o he needs
o a di e se socie y” – as ad anced in he Ac ion Plan on In eg a ion and Inclusion 2021-
2027 –
239
is o be uly honou ed, hen a di e en app oach o he implemen a ion o he
in eg a ion clauses se o h in EU seconda y legisla ion should be de eloped. Mo e
p ecisely, Membe S a es’ disc e ion should be bound o an in e p e a ion o hese clauses
which is consis en wi h he eleological p emises o Eu opean in eg a ion as a p ocess
unding a plu alis ic sys em o alues, in which cul u al di e si y canno be e ec i ely
espec ed in one ield (e.g. EU ci izenship) i i is neglec ed in o he s (e.g. EU immig a ion
and asylum law). Reducing de ia ion o Membe S a es’ p ac ice om he e e u ile o
234
See he bookle o he CERC Mig a ion Annual Con e ence 2022, i led “Mig a ion and he Ci y”,
ch .in o. See also M. A
MBROSINI
, Supe di e si y, Mul icul u alism and Local Policies: A S udy on
Eu opean Ci ies, in Policy & Poli ics, 2016, p. 1; A.
P
ISAREVSKAYA
,
P.
S
CHOLTEN
, Z.
K
AŞLI
, Classi ying
he Di e si y o U ban Di e si ies: An Induc i e Analysis o Eu opean Ci ies, in Jou nal o In e na ional
Mig a ion and In eg a ion, 2021, p. 655.
235
H.
S
CHAMMANN
e al., De ining and T ans o ming Local Mig a ion Policies: A Concep ual App oach
Backed by E idence om Ge many, in Jou nal o E hnic and Mig a ion S udies, 2021, p. 2897.
236
On his con inuum, see S.
C
ARRERA
,
J.
S
ANTOS
V
ARA
,
T.
S
TRIK
(eds.), Cons i u ionalising he Ex e nal
Dimensions o EU Mig a ion Policies in Times o C isis. Legali y, Rule o Law and Fundamen al Righ s
Reconside ed, No hamp on, 2019.
237
On he empo a y ein oduc ion o bo de con ols a he in e nal bo de s o he Schengen a ea, a ec ing
also EU ci izens, see M.
D
E
S
OMER
, Schengen and In e nal Bo de Con ols, in Ph. D
E
B
RUYCKER
,
M.
D
E
S
OMER
,
J.-L.
D
E
B
ROUWER
(eds.), F om Tampe e 20 o Tampe e 2.0, ci ., p. 119.
238
See, sup a, n. 17.
239
Ac ion Plan 2021-2027, pa a. 3.

In Sea ch o he Legal Bounda ies o an “Open Socie y”
184
www. sjeu os udies.eu
in eg a ion clauses in EU seconda y law should be a p ima y commi men o he Cou o
Jus ice. I should e hink i s easoning in cases such as Alo and Osso
240
in ligh o a
sys emic in e p e a ion o he disc e ion con e ed upon he Membe S a es by in eg a ion
clauses, aking in o due accoun hei pu pose o emo ing ba ie s o inclusion.
Second, conside ing “ he speci ic challenges aced by di e en g oups”
241
means
abandoning a minimalis app oach o non-disc imina ion owa ds TCNs, since i is
capable o hinde ing ab ini io mig an and e ugee p ospec s o in eg a ion.
242
Issues
associa ed wi h he legal s a us o non-ci izens should be eed om he ap o hei
ca ego isa ion unde he opposing pa adigms o “axiological uni e salism o s a is -
na ionalis pa icula ism”,
243
o be esol ed in connec ion wi h he o ma ion o he
Eu opean way o li e as an inclusi e one – a goal which has been en isaged by he Ac ion
Plan 2021-2027, in line wi h he Eu opean Pilla o Social Righ s.
244
Wi hin he Plan, emphasis on inclusi eness is suppo ed by he exp ess e e ence o
he cen epiece o he 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable De elopmen : he p inciple ha no
one shall be le behind.
245
This p inciple seems in insical o he Eu opean way o li e and
o he common Eu opean alues on which i is oo ed, “including democ acy, he ule o
law, he eedom o speech and eligion, as well as he igh s o equali y and non-
disc imina ion”.
246
Wha is mo e, he Ac ion Plan ex ends he pe sonal scope o he EU
agenda on social inclusion o co e bo h TCNs who a e mig an s o e ugees and EU
ci izens wi h a mig an backg ound,
247
so acknowledging ha by p eca ising he legal
s a us o TCNs, he old- ashioned app oach o in eg a ion isks downg ading he e y
same igh s o EU ci izens. Thus, i c ea es – a leas on pape – he condi ions o a ai e
app oach o in eg a ion and inclusion, an app oach ha should be de eloped in
coo dina ion wi h na ional sys ems and, in pa icula , h ough he ac i e ole o local
ac o s and domes ic judges.
248
240
The case is illus a ed sup a, pa a. 6.
241
Ac ion Plan 2021-2027, pa a. 3.
242
On he po en ial o he gene al p inciple o non-disc imina ion, along wi h he ele an p o isions o
he EUCFR, o os e an ex ensi e in e p e a ion o he no ion o “na ionali y” embedded in he T ea ies,
see C.
F
AVILLI
, L’applicazione ai ci adini di Paesi e zi del di ie o di disc iminazione pe mo i i di
nazionali à, in G.
C
AGGIANO
(a cu a di), I pe co si giu idici dell’in eg azione, ci ., p. 115. In gene al, J.
C
ROON
-G
ESTEFELD
, Reconcep ualising Eu opean Equali y Law. A Compa a i e Ins i u ional Analysis,
Ox o d, 2017.
243
On hese pa adigms, see R.
R
UBIO
-M
ARÍN
, In eg a ion in Immig an Eu ope: Human Righ s a a
C oss oads, in R.
R
UBIO
-M
ARÍN
(ed.), Human Righ s and Immig a ion, Ox o d, 2014, p. 73. See u he ,
S.
C
ARRERA
,
A.
W
IESBROCK
, Ci ic In eg a ion o Thi d-Coun y Na ionals. Na ionalism e sus
Eu opeanisa ion in he Common EU Immig a ion Policy, CEPS Policy Pape , Oc obe 2009.
244
On he syne gy be ween he EU immig an in eg a ion policy and he Eu opean Pilla o Social Righ s,
see he Ac ion Plan 2021-2027, pa a. 3.
245
On his p inciple, see he dedica ed webpage o he UN Sus ainable De elopmen G oup: unsdg.un.o g.
246
Ac ion Plan 2021-2027, pa a. 1.
247
Ibid.
248
On he ele ance o domes ic li iga ion in his ield, e e – among many ins ances – o he landma k
decision o he Conseil cons i u ionnel ançais on he applica ion o he p inciple o a e ni é o se aside
he mechanism o au oma ic c iminalisa ion o humani a ian assis ance o e ugees and mig an s who a e
“sans papie s” (Decision o 6 July 2018, M . Céd ic H. e al., no. 2018-717/718 QPC, pa a. 13). See also
he inpu p o ided by he I alian Cou o Cassa ion on he nexus exis ing be ween ulne abili y and social
Daniela Vi iello
185
An example o he key ole domes ic cou s may play, in dialogue wi h he Cou o
Jus ice, has ecen ly been p o ided by a decision o he I alian Cons i u ional Cou
249
on
wo e e al o de s om he I alian Cou o Cassa ion, asking i o s ike down, on
cons i u ional g ounds, a social secu i y p o ision excluding om a amily uni allowance
hose TCNs legally esiding and wo king in I aly, when he membe s o he amily uni
do no , in eali y, eside in I aly.
250
The I alian Cons i u ional Cou ully aligned o he
decision o he Cou o Jus ice in INPS cases,
251
in which i uled ha bo h he Long-
Te m Residence Di ec i e and he Single Pe mi Di ec i e
252
equi e Membe S a es o
au oma ically ex end social secu i y allowances o TCNs who wo k and eside legally.
Thus, he Cons i u ional Cou o de ed he Sup eme Cou o Cassa ion o disapply he
I alian p o ision in con as wi h EU law.
253
The las poin o add ess in he ecas ing o he EU app oach o immig an and e ugee
in eg a ion is ha so law, coo dina ion and unding ma e and could be he key o
building up he ope a ional pilla o he EU policy on immig an and e ugee
in eg a ion.
254
Syne ge ic ac ion coo dina ed by he Eu opean Commission h ough
guidelines and unding oppo uni ies could be e y e ec i e in inco po a ing he lessons
lea n om he e ugee c isis, namely ha ea ly-in eg a ion can make he di e ence in
u ning ailed in o success ul in eg a ion. This ac ion would p omo e he sp ead o bes
in eg a ion, in he uling n. 4455/2018 (C.
F
AVILLI
, La p o ezione umani a ia pe mo i i di in eg azione
sociale. P ime i lessioni a ma gine della sen enza della Co e di cassazione n. 4455/2018, in Ques ione
Gius izia, 14 Ma ch 2018, ques ionegius izia.i ). Vice e sa, on he ole o local ac o s in p omo ing
s a egic li iga ion be o e na ional cou s and a he Eu opean Cou o Human Righ s, e e , e.g., o he
Aus ian expe ience, as illus a ed by I.
A
TAÇ
, Gaygusuz . Aus ia: Ad ancing he Righ s o Non-Ci izens
h ough Li iga ion, in Aus ian Jou nal o Poli ical Science, 2017, p. 21.
249
On his aspec , see mo e b oadly A.
L
AMBERTI
, “Sos ene e l’in eg azione pe socie à più inclusi e”:
immig azione e di i i sociali nella ecen e giu isp udenza cos i uzionale, in I.
C
ARACCIOLO
,
G.
C
ELLAMARE
,
A.
D
I
S
TASI
,
P.
G
ARGIULO
(a cu a di), Mig azioni in e nazionali, p. 521.
250
I alian Cons i u ional Cou , judgmen o 11 Ma ch 2022, n. 67 (English ansla ion a ailable he e:
www.co ecos i uzionale.i ).
251
Cou o Jus ice, judgmen o 25 No embe 2020, INPS (P es a ions amiliales pou les i ulai es d’un
pe mis unique), case C-302/19; judgmen o 25 No embe 2020, INPS (P es a ions amiliales pou les
ésiden s de longue du ée), case C-303/19.
252
Mo e p ecisely, he I alian Cons i u ional Cou ’s uling, ci ., sup a, n. 250, e e s o A . 11(1)(d) o
Council Di ec i e 2003/109/EC, ci ., and o A . 12(1)(e) o Di ec i e 2011/98/EU, ci .
253
Fo u he examples o po en ially ui ul dialogues among cou s, see Cou o Appeal o Milan, o de
o 30 May 2022, ega ding a e e al o he I alian Cons i u ional Cou on he cons i u ionali y o an I alian
p o ision limi ing he igh o a gua an eed minimum income o pe sons who ha e been legally esiding
in I aly o en yea s ( he ex in I alian is a ailable he e: www.asgi.i ). Acco ding o he e e ing cou , he
equisi e o 10-yea esidence iola es he p inciple o p opo ionali y, as i does no conside he e ec i e
deg ee o TCN in eg a ion and would be unjus i ied in ligh o he I alian Cons i u ional Cou ’s judgmen
o 10 Janua y 2022, n. 19, since he Cons i u ional Cou did no se a empo al equi emen o p o e
s abili y o sojou n as a p econdi ion o he enjoymen o he igh o a gua an eed minimum income. In
addi ion, acco ding o he Cou o Appeal o Milan, he equisi e o 10-yea esidence cons i u es indi ec
disc imina ion agains TCNs, as de ined by he EU Cou o Jus ice in i s consolida e case law (e.g., G and
Chambe , judgmen o 18 July 2006, De Cuype , case C-406/04, pa a. 40; G and Chambe , judgmen o 23
Oc obe 2007, Mo gan and Buche , joined cases C‑11/06 and C‑12/06, pa a. 33).
254
On he ele ance o EU unding in his speci ic ield o compe ence, see A.
W
OLFFHARDT
, Making he
Mos o EU Funds o Suppo a Comp ehensi e App oach o Mig an In eg a ion, ReSOMA Policy Op ion
B ie s, Janua y 2020.
In Sea ch o he Legal Bounda ies o an “Open Socie y”
186
www. sjeu os udies.eu
p ac ices de eloped a he local and na ional le el,
255
such as “ ‘ci ic in eg a ion
encoun e s’ whe e e ugees, asylum seeke s, mig an s and membe s o he local
popula ion eely discuss key alues o he Eu opean Union”.
256
A he same ime, i
should os e inclusi i y o ci il socie y in local, na ional and sup ana ional decision
making p ocesses on ci ic in eg a ion. F om his s andpoin , he ins i u ion o an “Expe
G oup on he iews o mig an s”, composed o mig an s and o ganisa ions ep esen ing
hei in e es s and ope a ing as a consul a i e body o he Commission, seems an
impo an s ep in he igh di ec ion.
257
This Expe G oup will ha e a say in he design
and implemen a ion o u u e EU policies in he ield o mig a ion, asylum and
in eg a ion, wi h an expec ed bene icial impac on he o e all agency o people “on he
mo e” wi hin he EU.
Alongside he inco po a ion o mig an and e ugee agency in he decision-making
p ocess, he Ac ion Plan s eng hens he moni o ing, e alua ion and democ a ic o e sigh
o he implemen a ion o EU policy on immig an in eg a ion,
258
while p omo ing an
e idence-based deba e in he ield o in eg a ion, based on eliable da a and knowledge.
259
The in ol emen o EU agencies and esea ch ins i u ions could be key o he
achie emen o his goal, which migh also be ele an o eo ien ing he dominan
na a i es on mig a ions and hei consequences.
260
9. The way ahead
This analysis demons a es ha he sel - es ain o he Eu opean Union in he ield o
immig an and e ugee in eg a ion has been a poli ical choice mo e han a consequence
o compe ence limi a ion. TCN in eg a ion is in ac a complex p ocess, whose egula ion
canno be con ined wi hin he na ow emi o a sec o al compe ence. The exis ence o a
dedica ed EU immig an in eg a ion policy, and i s limi ed na u e, do no in ac , exclude
a mo e comp ehensi e unde s anding o in eg a ion, en enching his Union’s goal in all
policies pe aining o he AFSJ and he CEAS.
255
Fo a s ock aking o hese p ac ices, see Commission S a Wo king Documen , Accompanying he
documen Communica ion om he Commission o he Eu opean Pa liamen , he Council, he Eu opean
Economic and Social Commi ee and he Commi ee o he Regions, Ac ion Plan on In eg a ion and
Inclusion 2021-2027, o 24 No embe 2020, SWD(2020) 290 inal.
256
R.
M
EDDA
-W
INDISCHER
,
A.
C
ARLÀ
, Eu opean Ci ic In eg a ion and Common Values, ci ., p. 9.
257
The Expe G oup has been se up wi hin he Di ec o a e-Gene al o Mig a ion and Home A ai s o
he Eu opean Commission (DG HOME) and had i s kick-o mee ing on 12 No embe 2020. Fo u he
in o ma ion, e e o Eu opean Commission, Repo on he Consul a ion on he In eg a ion and Inclusion
o Mig an s and People wi h a Mig an Backg ound, No embe 2020, p. 11.
258
Ac ion Plan 2021-2027, pa a. 6.
259
Ibid., pa a. 5. On po en ial (and ela ed isks) o da a collec ion and use o e idence-based policies, see
J.
C
RISP
, Bewa e he No ion Tha Be e Da a Lead o Be e Ou comes o Re ugees and Mig an s. Expe
Commen , Cha ham House, 9 Ma ch 2018, www.cha hamhouse.o g.
260
Towa ds his aim, he de elopmen o an in e ac i e pla o m, o be hos ed on he Eu opean Websi e on
In eg a ion, will ensu e anspa ency o moni o ing ac i i ies and allow pa icipa ion om a wide ange o
pa ne s and s akeholde s. See he Ac ion Plan 2021-2027, pa a. 6.
Daniela Vi iello
187
A his junc u e, bo h he p opo ion o he challenges ahead and hei p ospec i e
impac on EU common alues seem o make his op ion mo e poli ically iable o he
Union and i s Membe S a es. Indeed, a “low-p o ile” EU policy in his ield o ac ion
would s e ch he ension embedded in he legal design o he AFSJ and he CEAS e en
u he , by minimising he co ela ion be ween success ul in eg a ion pa hs and e ec i e
immig a ion and asylum policies – an ou come which would appea a odds wi h he
pu sui o he Union’s goals and would hwa i s sel - ep esen a ion as an “open socie y”.
Vice e sa, s eamlining he New Pac on Mig a ion and Asylum o he goal o
immig an and e ugee “in eg a ion- h ough-di e si y” is he only easible “way o
ealising he po en ial o mig a ion”.
261
As i is acknowledged in he Pac i sel ,
“Success ul in eg a ion bene i s bo h he indi iduals conce ned, and he local communi ies
in o which hey in eg a e. I os e s social cohesion and economic dynamism. I se s posi i e
examples o how Eu ope can manage he impac s o mig a ion and di e si y by building open
and esilien socie ies. (…) While in eg a ion policy is p ima ily a Membe S a e
esponsibili y, he EU has s epped up i s suppo o Membe S a es and o he ele an
s akeholde s since he adop ion o he 2016 Ac ion Plan. (…) This wo k now needs o be
deepened, o ensu e ha meaning ul oppo uni ies a e p o ided o all o pa icipa e o ou
economy and socie y (…) [a]s pa o he p io i y on p omo ing ou Eu opean way o li e”.
262
ABSTRACT: Di e si y and plu alism a e embedded in he poli ical p ojec o he Union
as based on he a che ype o a libe al “open socie y”. A he same ime, he
p ese a ion and p omo ion o hese alues is being inc easingly challenged,
especially in he ields o EU compe ence which a e adi ionally mo e sensi i e o
he calls o so e eign y, such as on mig a ion and asylum policies. This a icle akes
he EU immig an in eg a ion policy as a case s udy o es he legal bounda ies o he
Eu opean open socie y. I depa s om he limi s o he EU compe ence in his ield
o ac ion o demons a e ha he sel - es ain o he Eu opean Union in he
de elopmen o “a mo e igo ous in eg a ion policy” has been i s and o emos a
poli ical op ion. This op ion has magni ied he ension embedded in he legal design
o he AFSJ and he CEAS, minimising he co ela ion be ween success ul in eg a ion
pa hs and e ec i e immig a ion and asylum policies. This e idence should induce
he Union – wi hin he emi o i s own compe ence – o g ea e ac i ism in suppo
o TCN in eg a ion and inclusion in he Eu opean open socie y.
KEYWORDS: Open Socie y – In eg a ion Clauses – Ci ic In eg a ion – Non-
Disc imina ion – EU Compe ence.
261
Al eady in hese e ms, Communica ion om he Commission, Eu opean Agenda o he In eg a ion o
Thi d-Coun y Na ionals, ci ., p. 2.
262
New Pac , pa a. 8.