Authorities’ Broad Discretion in Assessing Security Threats in Immigration Applications: The Fahimian Case

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This paper undertakes an analysis of the European Union Court of Justice (ECJ)
case Sahar Fahimian v. the Federal Republic of Germany, emphasizing its significance in elucidating the intricate interplay between migration and security. Particularly, the examination delves into the distinctions drawn between EU citizens and third-country nationals concerning their perceived impact on national security. The central inquiries addressed in this paper are twofold: Firstly, what is the understanding of national security within the framework of European Union Law? Secondly, what stance does the ECJ adopt regarding the intersection of legal migration and national security? The underlying hypothesis posits that the process of securitization evident in European politics manifests not only in the context of irregular migration but extends to encompass legal migration as well. This paper seeks to contribute to the legal analysis of the securitization of migration and aims to enrich the ongoing discourse on the nexus between migration and security within European Union Law.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)73-91
Number of pages19
JournalScientia Ivridica – Revista de Direito Comparado Português e Brasileiro
VolumeLXXII
Issue number361-363
Publication statusPublished - 31 Dec 2023

Keywords

  • Migration
  • Securitisation
  • National security
  • Terrorism
  • Students Directive

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Authorities’ Broad Discretion in Assessing Security Threats in Immigration Applications: The Fahimian Case'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this