Search

This thesis explores an internal EU border in Northern Europe during a ‘crisis’ scenario. In the aftermath of the Syrian Civil War, during 2015 Sweden received 160,000 applications for asylum, the third highest total number in Europe. Consequently, Sweden introduced three forms of border controls to restrict numbers, marking a significant shift in Swedish asylum policy. This thesis engages with the notion of ‘political moments’ concerning how occasions of heightened visibilities could be appropriated and brought into the political milieu in Sweden and Denmark during 2015-2016 and subsequently used in the operations of borderwork by state and non-state actors. Borderwork is understood in this thesis in a Rumfordian manner, where state and non-state actors can contribute to actions of bordering and debordering. The thesis analyses Sweden’s border controls, grounded in particular contextualities and operating within a specific EU legal framework. This thesis draws on semi-structured interviews with 53 individuals primarily from the state and civil society in both countries. Complexities within and between civil society and the state concerning borderwork are shown as being interpenetrating, and the state’s pervasive extension is explored through ‘the Snake’ and Posthusplatsen. Emotion as a political resource (which can be appealed to, framed and (re)produced to shape discourses) is analysed and seen vis-à-vis the political left and right as a mobilising force in both bordering and debordering. Finally, and as part of this, the notion of mourning is explored concerning the evocative question: Is this Sweden?

The decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court of December 14, 2015 in the Identitätskontrolle case is crucial for understanding the limits of the possibility to protect national fundamental rights in the European Union. FCC de facto carried out a review of compliance with the obligation under European Union law to unconditionally execute the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) with constitutional guarantees to protect the right to dignity, but ultimately concluded that constitutional guarantees essentially coincide with the EU provisions. When issuing its ruling, although it was clearly different from the EU CJ case law on EAW, the FCC stated that there is no need to ask a question for a preliminary ruling. In spite of this, the ruling clearly influenced the subsequent development of the EU CJ case law, above all, the Aranyosi and Căldăraru cases. Moreover, it seems that it has also significantly influenced the further dynamics of relations between national constitutional courts and the EU CJ in the field of protection of fundamental rights. It can even be said that it is crucial for understanding the dynamics of the process of a judicial dialogue within the EU. Orzeczenie niemieckiego Federalnego Trybunału Konstytucyjnego (FSK) z 14 grudnia 2015 r. w sprawie Identitätskontrolle ma kluczowe znaczenie dla rozumienia granic możliwości ochrony krajowych praw podstawowych w Unii Europejskiej. FSK de facto przeprowadził w nim kontrolę zgodności wynikającego z prawa Unii Europejskiej obowiązku bezwarunkowego wykonania Europejskiego Nakazu Aresztowania (ENA) z konstytucyjnymi gwarancjami ochrony prawa do godności, ostatecznie jednak dochodząc do wniosku, że gwarancje konstytucyjne zasadniczo pokrywają się z unijnymi. Wydając swoje orzeczenie, choć było ono ewidentnie różne od dotychczasowego orzecznictwa TSUE na temat ENA, FSK stwierdził brak potrzeby zadania pytania prejudycjalnego. Pomimo to, w ewidentny sposób orzeczenie to wpłynęło na późniejszy rozwój orzecznictwa TSUE, przede wszystkim na wyrok w sprawie Aranyosi i Căldăraru. Ponadto wydaje się, że w znacznym stopniu wpłynęło ono także na dalszą dynamikę relacji pomiędzy krajowymi sądami konstytucyjnymi a TSUE w zakresie ochrony praw podstawowych. Tym samym można nawet posunąć się do stwierdzenia, że ma ono kluczowe znaczenie dla zrozumienia dynamiki procesu dialogu sądowego wewnątrz UE.