Skip to main content
Project Report (GAPs Return Migration-Horizon Project) co-authored with
N. Ela GÖKALP ARAS; Tineke STRIK; Rebecca THORBURN STERN; Anna TRYLIŃSKA; Umutcan YÜKSEL
Research Interests:
This chapter aims to contribute to the ongoing debates related to the EU-Turkey (Migration/Refugee) Deal including the EU-Turkey Statement of 18 March 2016, by examining the effects of the Deal on the migration and asylum system of... more
This chapter aims to contribute to the ongoing debates related to the EU-Turkey (Migration/Refugee) Deal including the EU-Turkey Statement of 18 March 2016, by examining the effects of the Deal on the migration and asylum system of Turkey. In order to provide a clear analysis of these effects, the piece first focuses on the background, by demonstrating the main features of the Turkish system in the wake of the Deal to better assess the Deal’s impact on the current system. It then looks into the scope of this impact in more detail and concludes that the EU-Turkey Deal, as a new type of externalization tool for EU’s migration policy, has reflected its deterrent approach onto the migration and asylum system of Turkey, creating discrepancies, especially on the administrative capacity, legal framework and administrative practice. Thus, this reflection has resulted in a conversion of informally constituted inconsistencies to a formal structure.
Avrupa’da 2020 yılının Şubat ayında, ülkemizde ise Mart ayında kendini gösteren Covid 19 virüsünün yol açtığı salgın (Covid 19 (küresel) salgını), kısa bir süre içerisinde küresel bir pandemiye dönüşerek tüm dünya ülkelerini tehdit etmeye... more
Avrupa’da 2020 yılının Şubat ayında, ülkemizde ise Mart ayında kendini gösteren Covid 19 virüsünün yol açtığı salgın (Covid 19 (küresel) salgını), kısa bir süre içerisinde küresel bir pandemiye dönüşerek tüm dünya ülkelerini tehdit etmeye başlamıştır. Bu nedenle, küresel, bölgesel ve ulusal seviyede, salgının yayılımının önlenmesini amaçlayan çeşitli tedbirlerin alınması elzem hâle gelmiştir. Salgının önlenmesi için alınan istisnai tedbirlerin, uluslararası korumaya erişim bakımından da; sınırların kapatılması veya sınır geçişlerinin sınırlandırılması, uluslararası koruma başvurularını alma ve değerlendirmeden sorumlu personelin esnek çalışma düzenine geçmesi, sosyal mesafenin sağlanması, karantina uygulamaları gibi nedenlerle çeşitli sonuçlar doğurabilmesi söz konusu olmuştur.
Bu çalışmada, Covid 19 salgınının ve salgın nedeniyle alınan/alınabilecek tedbirlerin uluslararası korumaya erişim üzerindeki etkilerinin değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda çalışma iki ana başlık altında şekillendirilmiştir. İlk başlık altında Covid 19 salgınının uluslararası korumaya erişim üzerindeki olası etkilerinin hukuki çerçevesinin ağırlıklı olarak teorik bir eksende ortaya konulması hedeflenmiştir. İlk ana başlık kapsamında öncelikle uluslararası korumanın genel görünümüne yer verildikten sonra, uluslararası mülteci hukuku, uluslararası insan hakları sözleşmeleri ve Türk yabancılar hukuku bağlamında bir değerlendirme yapılmıştır. Çalışmanın ikinci ana başlığı altında ise ilk ana başlık kapsamında çizilen hukuki çerçeve ile Avrupa Birliği ve Türkiye uygulamalarının uyumu hususu değerlendirilmiştir. Avrupa Birliğine yönelik değerlendirme, üye devlet uygulamaları ve Birlik düzeyindeki yaklaşımlar olarak iki kategori üzerinden ele alınmıştır. Her bir üye devletin uygulamasına ayrıntılı olarak yer verilmesi bu çalışmanın boyutu ve bazı ülkelerin uygulamalarına yönelik kaynakların sınırlı olması ya da bu kaynaklara erişilememesi bakımından mümkün olmamıştır. Bu çerçevede, uygulamaları incelenen devletlerin belirlenmesinde, uygulamanın uluslararası mülteci hukuku ve insan hakları hukuku açısından olumsuz ya da olumlu anlamda özellik arz etmesi ve her halükârda uygulamaya yönelik kaynaklara erişim olanağının bulunması kriterleri temel alınmıştır. Türkiye uygulaması bakımından ise Covid 19 salgınının uluslararası korumaya erişim üzerindeki etkilerini belirgin bir şekilde gösterebilecek yeterli kaynağa ulaşılamadığı için, değerlendirmede, ağırlıklı olarak çeşitli ihtimallere dayanılarak bazı çıkarımların yapılması ile yetinilmiştir.
The main objective of this article is to evaluate the effects of the EU-Turkey Statement of 18 March 2016 on the asylum-related rights of the persons who fall within the scope of the Statement. The said evaluation covers the main... more
The main objective of this article is to evaluate the effects of the EU-Turkey Statement of 18 March 2016 on the asylum-related rights of the persons who fall within the scope of the Statement. The said evaluation covers the main characteristics of the Statement such as objective, scope, legal nature as well as Its reflections on the practices of Greece and Turkey. This article highlights that the migratory flow in 2015 from Turkey to Greek islands, which paved the way for the Statement, was merely labeled by the EU as an ‘irregular migratory movement’, although the main characteristic of this flow was that the majority of the migrants on the move were likely to be in need of international protection. By focusing on the ‘irregular’ character of the movement, Statement adopted a deterring approach as an extension of the EU’s externalization of migration and asylum policy and assigned two main tasks on Greece and Turkey: remotion by Greece and readmission by Turkey.  The article claims that the Statement’s approach on turning the blind eye to the protection-related character of the migratory flows has not diminished the actual problem. Indeed, the effect of the Statement on the asylum-related practice has exacerbated the need for an effective protection and access to durable solutions. The most significant confirmation of this position can be demonstrated in the recent crisis between Turkish and Greek borders when thousands of migrants including the asylum seekers had to face extremely harsh situations when rushed to the Greek borders following Turkey’s declaration that it wouldn’t prevent the exits from its borders. This incident once more showed that the real solution to the ‘problem’ is not shifting but sharing the physical responsibility with Turkey.

Keywords: EU-Turkey Statement, international protection, asylum, readmission, hotspots, temporary protection.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This country report focuses on developments that took place during the period of 2011-2017 in the field of migration in Turkey. Traditionally a country of emigration, starting from the early 1990s, it has also become an important country... more
This country report focuses on developments that took place during the period of 2011-2017 in the field of migration in Turkey. Traditionally a country of emigration, starting from the early 1990s, it has also become an important country of immigration, asylum, and transit. Most recently, the increasing pressure of the refugee challenge, particularly given the high number of arrivals from Syria, has put the country once again under international spotlights.

This report provides relevant migration statistics that are available as open source data. It briefly reviews the socio-economic, political and cultural characteristic of the country as well as its brief migration history. The report also delves into a detailed analysis of the constitutional, legal and institutional framework of Turkey’s national migration management
system, which has gone through a significant transition in the last few years. The report points out that due to Turkey’s geographical limitation to the 1951 Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1951 Convention), and its associated 1967 Protocol; Turkey does not grant refugee status to people fleeing from conflicts and persecution in non-European countries. But it does provide ‘conditional refugee status’ along with ‘refugee’ and ‘subsidiary’ protection. The introduction of new sets of legislation, including the Law on Foreigners and International Protection (LFIP) in 2013, and Temporary Protection Regulation (TPR) in 2014, together with the development of new state agency to deal with
migration affairs, the Directorate General of Migration Management (DGMM), paved the way for a more centrally organised national migration governance system. Moreover, the legal framework created with the LFIP and the TPR also established clearly defined migration categories such as regular migrant, irregular migrant, forced migrant and it set the criteria for granting temporary protection status.

The report reveals a key duality regarding European and non-European asylum seekers to be an important characteristic of Turkey’s asylum system. The first group can obtain ‘refugee’ status’; while the second group can only obtain ‘conditional refugee status’. However, regardless of their nationality, due to the Syrian mass migration, Syrian refugees are given another international protection status, which is called ‘temporary
protection’. Thus, together the LFIP and the TPR created a legal basis for asylum seekers from Syria and those from other countries to be the subject of two different asylum regimes in Turkey, with distinct sets of procedural rules, reception provisions and detention considerations (Refugee Rights Turkey, 2015, p.11).

The report concludes by highlighting that part of Turkey’s recent migration policy efforts is tied to encouragement coming from the EU for Turkey to improve conditions regarding access to the asylum process and status determination as well as enhancement of its facilities for asylum-seekers’ protection. Although these developments bring Turkey closer to satisfying the EU demands on migration and asylum policy, Turkey is still expected to abolish the geographical limitation of the 1951 Convention to create a full-fledged asylum system and to solve remaining implementation problems. Ensuring equal and fair access to asylum procedures and facilitating the full access of asylum-seekers to legal aid remain priorities still to be achieved.
This article aims to evaluate the development process of Turkish asylum law and to provide an analysis in regard to the effect of mass influx originating from Syria on the progress of Turkey’s legal scheme for asylum. In order to reach... more
This article aims to evaluate the development process of Turkish asylum law and to provide an analysis in regard to the effect of mass influx originating from Syria on the progress of Turkey’s legal scheme for asylum. In order to reach this objective, the article scrutinizes the legal aspects of the practice of Turkish asylum law before and after the legal reform of asylum that took place in 2014 and questions whether the ongoing flow originating from Syria risks the current asylum system to revert back to pre-2014 conditions.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Journal of Immigration Asylum and Nationality Law 2010, 24(4), 376-379
The legal framework of the Statement with respect to returns was the bilateral readmission protocol concluded between Turkey and Greece in 2002. However, the parties failed to finalise the legal process aiming to advance the applicability... more
The legal framework of the Statement with respect to returns was the bilateral readmission protocol concluded between Turkey and Greece in 2002. However, the parties failed to finalise the legal process aiming to advance the applicability of the provisions of the 2014 dated EU-Turkey Readmission Agreement on the readmission of third-country nationals by 1 June 2016. This failure rendered the protocol between Greece and Turkey to be the sole legal basis for the implementation of the readmission provisions of the EU-Turkey Statement. Although as per the Agreement, the provisions relating to the third country nationals were envisioned to enter into force by 1 October 2017, in its 2018 Turkey Report, the European Commission reported Turkey, citing the EU’s failure to take necessary steps towards visa liberalisation, has not implemented the Agreement. Yet, the said report of the Commission also noted the implementation of the Protocol between Turkey and Greece had also deteriorated.Indeed, Turkish Minister of Foreigner Affairs Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu, also stated this Protocol, which constitutes the legal basis for the implementation of readmissions based on the Statement, had been suspended.
Research Interests:
The Refugee Convention was designed for an earlier era, but there seems little will to update its provisions to meet today's reality.
Research Interests:
The Refugee Convention was designed for an earlier era, but there seems little will to update its provisions to meet today's reality.
Bu hukuki değerlendirme, Mültecilerle Dayanışma Derneği (Mülteci-Der) tarafından Avrupa Birliği Demokrasi ve İnsan Hakları Avrupa Aracı-Türkiye Programı kapsamında Avrupa Birliği’nin finansal desteğiyle yürütülen “İdari Gözetimde Haklar”... more
Bu hukuki değerlendirme, Mültecilerle Dayanışma Derneği (Mülteci-Der) tarafından Avrupa Birliği Demokrasi ve İnsan Hakları Avrupa Aracı-Türkiye Programı kapsamında Avrupa Birliği’nin finansal desteğiyle yürütülen “İdari Gözetimde Haklar” başlıklı proje kapsamında, Dr. Neva Övünç Öztürk ve Doç.Dr. K. Burak Öztürk tarafından hazırlanmıştır.