EVIDENCE IN EUROPEAN ASYLUM PROCEDURESPDF|Epub|txt|kindle电子书版本网盘下载

EVIDENCE IN EUROPEAN ASYLUM PROCEDURESPDF格式电子书版下载

注意：本站所有压缩包均有解压码： 点击下载压缩包解压工具

Ⅰ. Introduction1

1. To Begin With1

1.1. To Grasp Realities1

1.2. Frameworks2

2. The Question at Hand3

2.1. Evidence in European Asylum Procedures and Aims for the Study3

2.2. Frames6

2.3. Context7

2.4. Definitions and Meanings9

3. Means and Methods10

3.1. Methodological Choices10

3.2. Use of Comparative Method12

3.3. Materials16

Ⅱ. Substantive Framework for the Study19

1. Refugee Status Determination19

1.1. Definitions of Refugeehood19

1.2. Asylum21

1.3. Subsidiary Protection24

2. Refugee Status Determination in National Procedures25

3. The Common European Asylum System27

3.1. Background to the Common European Asylum System27

3.2. Relevant Legislation28

3.2.1. General Framework29

3.2.2. Secondary Legislation33

4. Asylum in Context34

Ⅲ. Asylum and Evidence35

1. Evidentiary Framework for the Study35

1.1. What Is Assessment of Evidence?35

1.2. Questions of Interest and Debatable Solutions36

1.3. Evidence in Administrative Context37

2. Evidence in Asylum Procedure42

2.1. The Role of Evidence in Asylum Procedure42

2.2. Particular Evidentiary Features43

2.2.1. High Stakes and Vested Interests43

2.2.2. Position of Parties in Appellate Asylum Procedure44

2.2.3. Prognostic Decision45

2.2.4. Forms of Evidence46

2.2.5. Confidential Evidence49

3. Evidence in EU Asylum Law50

3.1. General Principles of EU Law50

3.2. The Qualification Directive and Evidence54

3.3. The Asylum Procedures Directive and Evidence60

Ⅳ. Evidence in the European Appellate Asylum Procedure65

1. Aim and Method65

2. Theme of Proof67

3. Burden of Proof69

3.1. Definition69

3.2. Normative Frames for the Burden of Proof in European Asylum Procedures71

3.3. Burden of Proof in an Appellate European Asylum Procedure73

4. Evidentiary Robustness76

4.1. Definition of Concepts76

4.2. Development of Concepts in Appellate Administrative Procedures78

4.3. Normative Frames for Evidentiary Robustness in European Asylum Procedures82

4.4. Evidentiary Robustness in an Appellate European Asylum Procedure84

5. Methods of Evidentiary Assessment87

5.1. Definition of Concept87

5.2. Choice of Method88

5.3. Normative Frames for the Choice of Method for Evidentiary Assessment91

5.4. Method of Evidentiary Assessment in an Appellate European Asylum Procedure92

5.5. Credibility Assessment as an Integral Part of Assessing Evidence94

6. Standard of Proof96

6.1. Definition96

6.2. Establishing the Standard of Proof98

6.3. Normative Frames for Standard of Proof in European Asylum Procedures99

6.4. Standard of Proof in an Appellate European Asylum Procedure101

7. Evidence As a Procedural Instrument in Asylum Procedure105

Ⅴ. Use of Evidence in German Appellate Asylum Procedure107

1. Aims, Method and Material107

2. Frameworks of German Asylum Procedure108

2.1. General Framework108

2.1.1. World War II and German Asylum Procedure109

2.1.2. Germany and Europe111

2.2. Legal Framework for German Asylum Procedure112

2.2.1. Definitions and Eligibility112

2.2.2. General Procedural Framework114

2.2.3. Particular Procedural Frameworks115

2.3. Institutional Framework and Judicial Review115

2.3.1. Institutional Framework115

2.3.2. Judicial Review of Asylum Decisions117

3. Salient Features of German Asylum Procedure119

3.1. Responsibility for Establishing Facts119

3.2. National Environment120

3.3. Procedural Efficiency and the Motion to Take Evidence (Beweisantrag)122

4. Evidence in German Appellate Asylum Procedure123

4.1. Burden of Proof124

4.2. Evidentiary Robustness127

4.2.1. Quantitative Robustness128

4.2.2. Qualitative Robustness131

4.3. Standard of Proof134

4.4. Methods of Evidentiary Assessment139

5. Conclusions141

Ⅵ. Evidence in Finnish Appellate Asylum Procedure143

1. Aims and Method143

2. Frameworks of Finnish Asylum Procedure144

2.1. Legislative Framework144

2.1.1. General Administrative Framework145

2.1.2. Special Legislation146

2.2. Institutional Framework147

2.3.1. Historical Development and Present Status148

2.2.2. Current Structure of the Procedure148

3. Salient Features of Finnish Asylum Procedure151

3.1. Institutional Solutions151

3.2. Low Levels of Applications152

4. Evidence in Finnish Appellate Asylum Procedure154

4.1. Burden of Proof155

4.2. Evidentiary Robustness159

4.3. Standard of Proof166

4.4. Methods of Evidentiary Assessment168

5. Conclusions171

Ⅶ. Evidence in English Appellate Asylum Procedure173

1. Aims and Method173

2. Frameworks for English Asylum Procedure174

2.1. Defining Frameworks and History174

2.2. Institutional Framework177

2.3. The Nature of Tribunal Justice179

2.4. Legislative Framework180

3. Salient Features of English Asylum Procedure181

3.1. Argumentative Justice181

3.2. Adversarial Procedures183

3.3. The Parties to the Procedure184

3.3.1. The Home Office185

3.3.2. The Appellant185

3.4. Judicial Openness186

4. Evidence in English Appellate Asylum Procedure188

4.1. Burden of Proof188

4.2. Evidentiary Robustness190

4.2.1. Robustness and Adversarial Justice190

4.2.2. Quantitative Robustness195

4.2.3. Qualitative Robustness196

4.3. Standard of Proof198

4.4. Methods of Evidentiary Assessment200

5. Conclusions204

Ⅷ. Comparison of Evidentiary Standards205

1. Introduction205

2. Burden of Proof205

3. Evidentiary Robustness210

4. Methods of Evidentiary Assessment217

4.1. Methods of Evidentiary Assessment217

4.2. Practical Assessment of Evidence218

5. Standard of Proof221

6. The Role of International Refugee Law in Forming National Evidentiary tandards224

7. The Role of EU Law in Forming National Evidentiary Standards228

8. The Role of National Traditions in Forming National Evidentiary Standards235

9. Conclusions241

Ⅸ Harmonisation of Procedures in the Common European Asylum System243

1. Outsets243

1.1. Aims and Competence243

1.2. From Here249

1.3. ... To There251

1.3.1. Burden of Proof251

1.3.2. Evidentiary Robustness252

1.3.3. Methods of Evidentiary Assessment254

1.3.4. Standard of Proof255

2. Working Towards Commonality256

2.1. The Limits of Legal Approximation256

2.2. Means of Convergence257

3. Conclusions261

Ⅹ. Evidence in European Appellate Asylum Procedure263

1. The Goal of Commonality263

2. Evidence in the National Framework264

3. Evidence in Common European Asylum Procedure265

Annex Ⅰ269

Bibliography271

Index289