The Italy-Albania Migration Protocol: Externalised Border Governance and Rights Protection in the European Union (Published)
The Italy-Albania Migration Protocol is a new type of migration externalisation, involving extraterritorial processing of asylum claims and the exercise of Italian jurisdiction over migration centers in Albania. This article critically evaluates the Protocol from the perspective of constitutional law, international human rights law and European migration governance, with particular focus on the decision of the Albanian Constitutional Court on the constitutionality of the Protocol. It examines the legal implications of overlapping Albanian and Italian jurisdictions and highlights outstanding concerns related to territorial sovereignty, access to justice, effective remedies, detention and protection of asylum seekers under Albanian, Italian, EU and European Convention on Human Rights standards. The article also examines the legal basis cited for the Protocol and the difficulties arising from the extraterritorial application of Italian law in Albania. The Protocol exposes a core contradiction in the externalisation of migration control: while migration management functions may be displaced territorially, the obligations of states to ensure fundamental rights and effective judicial protection cannot. The Italy–Albania deal thus constitutes a critical test case for the changing relationship between migration externalisation, state sovereignty, jurisdiction and human rights protection in Europe. The article warns that jurisdictional ambiguity and accelerated procedures for migration can weaken effective rights protection unless accompanied by accessible judicial remedies and strong institutional oversight.
Keywords: EU migration policy, Human Rights, Italy-Albania Migration Protocol, State Sovereignty, access to justice, asylum governance; extraterritorial jurisdiction;, migration externalization
International Water Law in the Mekong River Basin: A Role for Amicus Curiae? (Published)
The current framework for public participation under the 1995 Agreement on the Cooperation for the Sustainable Development of the Mekong River Basin has no clear statement or mechanism for access to justice. Without access to justice, the public is limited in its ability within the context of the agreement to enforce and verify obligations as well as prevent or remedy adverse impacts related to the development and management of the Mekong River Basin. In the event the parties to the agreement submit differences and disputes to an international court or tribunal, the procedure of amicus curiae can be used to facilitate access to justice. This article explores the background of access to justice in the context of the agreement and how the procedure of amicus curiae may function to facilitate access to justice.
Keywords: International law, access to justice, amicus curiae, public participation, water