What European Union strategy for integrating migrants? the role of OMC soft mechanisms in the development of an EU immigration policy

European Journal of Migration and Law

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 53-82

  Velluti, Samantha ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Immigration; Integration; Open method of coordination; Third country nationals

Indexed keywords

EID: 34547605666     PISSN: 1388364X     EISSN: 15718166     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/138836407X179300     Document Type: Article

References (162)

1. See Presidency Conclusions of the Lisbon European Council, 23 & 24 March 2000. All Presidency Conclusions available at http://europa.eu.int/ european_council/conclusions/index_en.htm.
2. See B. Laffan and C. Shaw, Classifying and Mapping the Open Method of Coordination In Different Policy Areas, July 2005, Project No. 02/D9, NEWGOV, New Modes of Governance Project, Project No. CIT1-CT-2004-506392, at http://eucenter.wisc.edu/OMC/Papers/laffanShaw.pdf.
3. See the rigid conditionality contained in Article 5(2) of Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents, OJ L 16/44, 23.1.2004.
4. See G. Sasse, 'Securitization or Securing Rights? Exploring the Conceptual Foundations of Policies towards Minorities and Migrants in Europe' (2005) 43(4) Journal ofCommon Market Studies675.
5. Ibidem, 680.
6. Ibidem.
7. Ibidem, 689.
8. See J. Kenner, EU Employment Law, From Rome to Amsterdam(Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2003) p. 127.
9. See H.H. Koh, "Transnational Legal Process' (1996) 75 Nebraska Law Review20.
10. See D. Kostakopoulou, 'Ideas, Norms and European Citizenship: Explaining Institutional Change' (2005) Modern Law Review235-238.
11. See K. Armstrong and S. Bulmer, The Governance of the Single Market(Manchester: MUP, 1998), Ch. 2.
12. See I. Pernice, 'Multilevel Constitutionalism and the Treaty of Amsterdam: European Constitution-Making Revised?' (1999) 36 Common Market Law Review706.
13. See S. Sciarra, 'Global or Re-Nationalised? Past and Future of European Labour Law,' in F. Snyder (ed.), The Europeanisation of Law, (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2000) pp. 269-291.
14. See also M. Jachtenfuchs, 'Theoretical Perspectives on European Governance' (1995) 1(2) European Law Journal115.
15. See J. Weiler, 'Journey to an Unknown Destination: A Retrospective of the European Court of Justice in the Arena of Political Integration' (1993) 31(4) Journal of Common Market Studies419.
16. e.g. private, public or mixed public-private bodies, such as multinational firms, non-governmental organizations and social movements. See G. de Búrca, Reappraising Subsidiarity's Significance after Amsterdam, Jean Monnet Working Paper, No. 7/99, p. 2.
17. According to this concept the law is adopted exclusively by the state and, at the same time, it is at the exclusive service of the state. See O. Mayer, Deutsches Verwaltungsrecht, Volume I(Leipzig: Duncker and Humblot 1895) pp. 64 et seq.
18. See I. Pernice, op. cit., supra, note 12, 709. Pernice argues that the concept of 'multilevel constitutionalism' leads to a notion of constitution, which is not bound to a rigid concept of the State. See also, I-J. Sand, 'Understanding the New Forms of Governance: Mutually Interdependent, Reflexive, Destabilised and Competing Institutions' (1998) 4(3) European Law Journal270-273.
19. See B. Sousa Santos, 'State, Law and Community in the World System: an Introduction' (1992) Social & Legal Studies133-135.
20. See G. Marks, L. Hooghe and K. Blank, 'European Integration from the 1980s: State-Centric v. Multiple-Level Governance'(1996) 34 Journal of Common Market Studies342.
21. See G. de Búrca, op. cit., supra, note 15, pp. 2, 4 and 6.
22. Idem.
23. See W.H. Reinicke and J.M. Witte, 'Interdependence, Globalization, and Sovereignty: The Role of Nonbinding International Legal Accords', in D. Shelton (ed.), Commitment and Compliance. The Role of Non-Binding Norms in the International Legal System, (Oxford: OUP, 2000), p. 81. The 'external' dimension of sovereignty refers to relationships among states in the international system, defined by the absence of a central authority.
24. Ibidem, p. 89.
25. See A. Wendt, 'Collective Identity Formation and the International State' (1994) 88 American Political Science Review388-391.
26. See A. Geddes, 'Europe's Border Relationships and International Migration Relations' (2005) 43(4) Journal of Common Market Studies788.
27. See D. Kostakopoulou, 'Irregular Migration and Migration Theory: Making State Authorisation Less Relevant', in B. Bogusz et al. (eds.), Irregular Migration and Human Rights: Theoretical, European and International Perspectives, (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2004), p. 48.
28. See W.H. Reinicke and J. M. Witte, op. cit., supra, note 22, p. 92.
29. See H.H. Koh, 'Why Do Nations Obey International Law?' (1997) 106 Yale Law Journal2599.
30. See A.M. Slaughter, "The Real New World Order' (1997) 76 Foreign Affairs183, 197.
31. See D. Kostakopoulou and R. Thomas, 'Unweaving the Threads: Territoriality, National Ownership of Land and Asylum Policy' (2004) 6 European Journal of Migration and Law5, 6.
32. See S. Peers, 'EU Immigration and Asylum Law: Internal Market Model or Human Rights Model' in T. Tridimas and P. Nebbia (eds.), European Union Law for the Twenty-First Century, Vol. 1 (Oxford: Hart 2004), p. 345.
33. See A. Caviedes, 'The Open Method of Coordination in Immigration Policy: A Tool for prying Open Fortress Europe?' (2004) 11(2) Journal of European Public Policy289, 292.
34. See A. Geddes, Immigration and European Integration: Towards Fortress Europe?(Manchester: MUP, 2000), p. 3; M. Condinanzi et al., Cittadinanza dell'Unione e Libera Circolazione delle Persone(Milan: Giuffrè Editore, 2003), pp. 224 et seq.
35. See Title VI of the TEU, Articles K1-K9.
36. See Tide IV on Visas, Asylum, Immigration and other Policies related to Free Movement of Persons, Articles 61-69 EC. In particular, Article 63(3) EC has become the main legal basis for all legislation concerning regular migration. For a historical overview, see A. Geddes, op. cit., supra, note 33, pp. 131-139.
37. From 1 January 2005 the Council acts in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 251 EC when adopting measures referred to in Articles 62(1), (2) (a) and (3) EC and 63(2)(b) and (3)(b) EC. See Council Decision of 22 December 2004 providing for certain areas covered by Tide IV of Part Three of the Treaty establishing the European Community to be governed by the procedure laid down in Article 251 of that Treaty (2004/927/EC).
38. See Article I-14(2)(j) CT which expressly provides that policies concerning AFSJ would be a matter of shared competence; Chapter IV, Part III.
39. See Presidency Conclusions of the Tampere European Council, 15-16 Oct. 1999. The Conclusions set up a framework for a five-year programme that aimed at establishing a balance between freedom, security and justice and focused on four main points: a) partnership with countries of origin; b) a common European asylum system; c) fair treatment of third-country nationals; d) management of migration flows. It also presented a timetable (the Tampere scoreboard), which specified deadlines and gave structure to the agenda in these areas.
40. See Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents, OJ L 16/44, 23.1.2004; Council Directive 2004/114/EC of 13 December 2004 on the conditions of admission of third-country nationals for the purposes of studies, pupil exchange, unremunerated training or voluntary service, OJ L 375, 23.12.2004; Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification, OJ L 251/12, 3.10.2003; Council Regulation (EC) No 859/2003 of 14 may 2003 extending the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71; Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 to nationals of third countries who are not already covered by those provisions solely on the ground of their nationality, OJ L 124/1, 20.5.2003; Regulation 1030/2002 on a uniform residence permit format, OJ 2002 L 157/1.
41. For a detailed analysis of the main measures adopted in the field of immigration law and policy, see J. Apap and S. Carrera, Towards a Proactive Immigration Policy for the EU?, CEPS Working Document No. 198, Brussels: CEPS 2003.
42. In this context 'policy convergence' refers to the level of Europeanisation comprising both the adoption of legal instruments at EU level as well as the degree of transposition of these measures into the Member States' national legal systems.
43. See T Balzacq and S. Carrera, Migration, Borders and Asylum, Trends and Vulnerabilities in EU Policy(Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies 2005), p. 1.
44. See S. Peers, op. cit., supra, note 31, pp. 351-352;
45. see also Case C-11/92, The Queen v Secretary of State for Health, ex parte Gallaher Ltd, Imperial Tobacco Ltd and Rothmans International Tobacco (UK) Ltd., [1993] ECR I-3545.
46. See S. Weatherill, 'Beyond pre-emption? Shared competence and constitutional change in the European Community', in D. O'Keeffe and P. Twomey (eds.), Legal Issues of the Maastricht Treaty(Wiley, 1994).
47. See Y. Schibel, 'Transposing EU Law on Legal Migration' (2005) 6 European Journal of Migration and Law399.
48. See F. de Ceceo, 'Room to Move? Minimum Harmonization and Fundamental Rights' (2006) 43(1) Common Market Law Review9-30.
49. See Joined Cases C-20 & 64/00, Booker Aquaculture and Hydro Seafood v. The Scottish Ministers, ECR 1-7411 and Case C-71/02, Karner v. Troostwijk, ECR I-3025.
50. See F. de Ceceo, op. cit., supra, note, 46, 28.
51. Idem.
52. E.g. as family members of EU citizens TNCs enjoy derived rights under EC law, see Case - C-413/99, Baumbast, R v Secretary of State for the Home Department[2002] ECR I-6557, Case C-60/00, Mary Carpenter v Secretary of State for the Home Department[2002] ECR1-6279, Case C-109/01, Secretary of State for the Home Department v Hacene Akrich, [2003] ECR I-9607; as providers of services in their capacity of employees of an enterprise established in the EU,
53. see Case C-113/89, Rush Portuguesa, [1990] ECR I-1417 and Case C-43/93, Raymond Vander Eist v Office des migrations internationals, [1994] ECR I-3803;
54. some TCNs are granted specific rights under association or co-operation agreements, e.g. the Association Agreement between Turkey and the EC signed on 12 September 1963 [OJ 1964, P 217/3687], the 'Ankara Agreement' and its Protocol signed on 23 November 1970 [OJ 1973, C 113/18].
55. See G. Davies, "Any place I Hang My Hat?'or: Residence is the New Nationality' (2005) 11(1) European LawJournal43-56.
56. E.g. Case C-13/95, Süzen v Zehnacker Gebäudereinigung Krankenhausservice, [1997] ECR I-1259 (transfer of undertakings);
57. Joined Cases C-163/94, C-165/94&250/94, CriminalProceedings against Sanz De Lera and others, [1995] ECR I-4821 (free movement of capital and freedom of payments). In addition, two Article 13 Directives on anti-discrimination also apply to TCNs: Directive 2000/43/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, OJ 2000, L180/22, (the Race Equality Directive) and Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, OJ 2000, L303/16, (the Framework Employment Directive).
58. See Directive 2005/71/EC on a specific procedure for admitting third-country nationals for the purposes of scientific research, OJ 2005, L289/15.
59. See P. Boeles et al., 'Draft Directive on minimum guarantees for individual security, freedom and justice in relation to decisions regarding free movement of persons', (2005) 7(3) European Journal of Migration and Law301-319;
60. R. Cholewinski, "The Need for Effective Legal Protection in Immigration Matters' (2005) 7(3) European Journal of Migration and Law237-262.
61. See Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003 concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents, OJ L 16/44, 23.1.2004. Cfr. the final draft of the Directive with the European Commission Proposal for a Council Directive concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents, COM(2001) 0127 final CNS 2001/0074.
62. For a critical analysis of the Directive, see S. Boelaert-Suominen, 'Non-EU Nationals and Council Directive 2003/109/EC on the Status of Third-Country Nationals Who are Long-Term Residents: Five Paces Forward and Possibly Three Paces Back' (2005) 42 Common Market Law Review1011-1052;
63. S. Peers, 'Implementing Equality? The Directive on long-term resident third-country nationals', (2004) 29 European Law Review437;
64. and L. Halleskov, "The Long-Term Residents Directive: A Fulfilment of the Tampere Objective of Near-Equality?' (2005) 7(2) European Journal of Migration and Law181-201.
65. See Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification, OJ L 251/12, 3.10.2003. This Directive constitutes the first of a set of measures based on Article 63(3)a EC on legal migration.
66. It is questionable whether the Directive is compatible with the Convention on the Rights of the Child (in particular, see Articles 2-5, 9-10; 27; 32-40) and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families (inter alia, Articles 14-20). See also Case C-540/03, European Parliament v Council of the European Union.
67. See Article 8 ECHR and Article 7 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (Article II-67CT).
68. See Article 6 TEU.
69. See H. Stalford, 'European Union Family Law: A Human Rights Perspective' in G. Straetmans et al. (eds.), Models of International Family Law for the European Union, (The Netherlands, Intersentia, 2007), forthcoming.
70. See Article 14(2) of the Directive.
71. See Y. Schibel, op. cit., supra, note 45, 401.
72. See Council Directive 2001/55/EC of 20 July 2001 on minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of displaced persons and on measures promoting a balance of efforts between Member States in receiving such persons and bearing the consequences thereof.
73. See Council Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003 laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers.
74. For an analysis of immigrants' integration in the EU, see, infra, section 3.
75. See Council Decision on Guidelines for the Employment Policies of the Member States, [2003] OJ L197/13, guideline 7.
76. See Council Directive 2004/81/EC of 29 April 2004 on the residence permit issued to third-country nationals who are victims of trafficking in human beings or who have been the subject of an action to facilitate illegal immigration, who cooperate with the competent authorities, OJ L261, 6 August 2004.
77. See Articles 7, 9 and 11 of the Directive.
78. See Preamble, paragraphs 6 and 7.
79. See Article 13(2) of the Directive.
80. Even though the Directive does envisage the possibility of converting this short-term residence permit into a permanent one it is still left to the discretion of the Member State (Preamble, paragraph 15).
81. See International Law Practitioners' Association (ILPA) and E. Guild, House of Lords, Select Committee on the European Union, The Hague Programme: A Five-year Agenda fir EU Justice and Home Affairs, Report with Evidence, 10th Report, HL Paper 84, Session 2004-05, Written Evidence, London, 23 March 2005, pp. 36-37 and 29.
82. See Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels European Council, 4-5 Nov 2004.
83. Ibidem.7.
84. See European Commission, Communication on the Hague Programme: Ten priorities for the next five years - The partnership for European renewal in the field of Freedom, Security and Justice, COM(2005) 184 final, Brussels, 10.5.2005. The ten policy priorities are: 1) fundamental rights and citizenship; 2) the fight against terrorism; 3) a common asylum area; 4) migration management; 5) integration of migrants;
85. integrated management of external borders; 7) privacy and security in sharing information; 8) developing a clear concept of organised crime; 9) justice - guaranteeing an effective European area of civil and criminal justice; and 10) sharing responsibility and solidarity for freedom, security and justice.
86. See Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels European Council, 4-5 Nov 2004, Annex I, p. 5.
87. Ibidem, pp. 10-11.
88. Ibidem, pp. 3-4; 15-16 and 18-26.
89. Ibidem, p. 3.
90. See Commission Communication for a Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights and Proposal for a Council Decision empowering the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights to pursue its activities in areas referred to in Title VI of the Treaty on European Union, COM(2005) 280 final.
91. See House of Lords, Select Committee on the European Union, The Hague Programme: A Fiveyear Agenda for EU Justice and Home Affairs, Report with Evidence, 10th Report, HL Paper 84, Session 2004-05, London, 23 March 2005, pp. 11-13 and p. 34.
92. For a critique of the principle of justice in the Hague Programme, see E. Brouwer, 'Effective Remedies for Third Country Nationals in EU Law: Justice Accessible to All?' (2005) 7(3) European Journal of Migration and Law216-236.
93. See Case C-63/99 R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Wieslaw Gloszczuk and Elzbieta Gloszczuk[2001] ECR I-6369;
94. Case C-257/99 R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Julius Barkoci and Marcel Malik[2001] ECR 1-6557;
95. Case C-235/99 R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Eleonora Ivanova Kondova[2001] ECR1-6427.
96. See B. Bogusz, 'Regulating the right of establishment for Accession State Nationals: reinforcing the 'buffer zone' or improving labour market flexibility?' (2002) 27 European Law Review472.
97. See Case C-136/03, Verwaltungsgerichtshof Georg Dörr v Sicherheitsdirektion für das Bundesland Kärnten and Ibrahim Ünal v Sicherheitsdirektion für das Bundesland Vorarlberg, judgment of 2 June 2005.
98. See Case C-467/02, Inam Cetinkaya v Land Baden-Württemberg, [2004] ECR I-10895.
99. See Council Directive 64/221/EEC of 25 February 1964 on the co-ordination of special measures concerning the movement and residence of foreign nationals which arc justified on grounds of public policy, public security or public health, OJ 56 of 04/04/1964, repealed by Directive 2004/38.
100. See Article II-105 CT.
101. See B. Bogusz, 'Modes of Governance for an EU Immigration Policy- What Role for the Open Method of Coordination', in B. Bogusz et al. (eds), Irregular Migration and Human Rights: Theoretical, European and International Perspectives(Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2004), p. 224.
102. See N. Walker, 'Sovereignty and Differentiated Integration in the European Union', (1998) 4(4) European Law Journal355-388;
103. C-D. Ehlermann, 'How Flexible is Community Law? An Unusual Approach to the Concept of'Two Speeds" (1984) 82 Michigan Law Review1274-1293;
104. for an economic analysis of the advantages and losses of enhanced cooperation for the Member States, see M. Bordignon and S. Brusco, Report On Enhanced Cooperation, April 2004; Revised April 2005, at: http://www4.unicatt.it/Docenti/Bordignon/download/On%20Enhanced%20 Cooperation.pdf.
105. See S. Giubboni, Diritti e politiche sociali nella crisi'europea, Working Paper 30/2004- Centro Studi di Diritto del Lavoro Europea 'Massimo D'Antona', Universita' di Catania, 17.
106. See A. Caviedes, op. cit., supra, note 32, 290.
107. See M. Dougan, 'Minimum Harmonization and the Internal Market' (2000) 37(4) Common Market Law Review863.
108. See Presidency Conclusions of the Lisbon European Council, 23 & 24 March 2000.
109. Idem.
110. See Integrated Guidelines for Growth and Jobs (2005-2008), COM(2005) 141 final, Integrated Guidelines 12 and 20.
111. See Council Decision of 22 July 2003 on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (2003/578/EC), Guidelines 3 and 5; Council Decision of 12 July 2005 on Guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (2005/600/EC), priority 1, p. 5.
112. See European Commission Communication on An Open Method of Coordination for the Community Immigration Policy, COM(2001) 387 final, p. 5.
113. See, supra, note 52, for Directives adopted on the basis of Article 13 EC.
114. See European Commission Communication on A Community Immigration Policy, COM(2000) 757 final, pp. 5-6 and 9-11; Guideline 7 of the 2003 Employment Policy Guidelines, Council Decision of 22 July 2003 on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (2003/578/EC).
115. See European Commission Communication on Immigration, Integration and Employment, COM(2003) 336, pp. 17-30.
116. See European Commission Communication on A Common Agenda for Integration - Framework for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals in the European Union, COM(2005) 389 final, pp. 3 and 9.
117. The Council, however, did not reach any agreement on the provisions of this directive so at present the latter remains a draft proposal.
118. See COM(2003) 336, pp. 17-30.
119. ARGO succeeded the Odysseus programme.
120. See A. Caviedes, op. cit., supra, note 32, 299.
121. See Articles 9, 11, 12 and 13 of Council Directive 2005/71/EC of 12 November 2005 on a specific procedure for admitting third-country nationals for purposes of scientific research.
122. See G. de Búrca, 'Beyond the Charter: How Enlargement has enlarged the Human Rights Policy of the EU', in O. De Schutter and S. Deakin (eds.), Social Rights and Market Forces: Is the Open Coordination of Employment and Social Policies the Future of Social Europe?, (Bruxelles: Bruylant., 2005), pp. 263-265.
123. See Directive 2004/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of Citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC.
124. See A. Caviedes, op. cit., supra, note 32, 304.
125. See Presidency Conclusions of the European Council in Laeken, 14 and 15 December 2001, paras. 37 and 40.
126. See Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Area of Freedom, Security and Justice: Assessment of the Tampere programme and future orientations COM(2004) 401 final.
127. See Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, Biannual Update of the Scoreboard to Review Progress on the Creation of an Area of'Freedom, Security and Justice' in the European Union (First Half of 2001), COM(2001) 278 final.
128. See M. Pollack, "The End of Creeping Competence ? EU Policy-Making Since Maastricht', 38 (3) (2000) Journal of Common Market Studies519-538.
129. See Council Decision of 13 June 2002 adopting an action programme for administrative cooperation in the fields of external borders, visas, asylum and immigration (ARGO programme), 2002/463/EC;
130. Council Decision of 13 December 2004 amending Decision 2002/463/EC adopting an action programme for administrative cooperation in the fields of external borders, visas, asylum and immigration (ARGO programme) 2004/867/EC.
131. The ARGO programme covers the period from 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2006. Further information, at http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/funding/ argo/funding_argo_en.htm.
132. The ARGO Committee is composed of representatives of the Member States.
133. See Commission StaffWorking Paper, First annual report to the Council and the European Parliament on the implementation of the ARGO programme (2002-2003), Brussels 17.02.2004, SEC (2004) 211.
134. See C. Barnard and S. Deakin, Corporate Governance, European Governance and Social Rights, paper presented at 'Fundamental Social Rights: a conference to mark the 40th anniversary of the introduction of a course on Industrial Law (later called Labour Law) in Part II of the Cambridge Law Tripos', University of Cambridge, 21 July 2001.
135. See M. Pollack, op. cit., supra, note 115.
136. See D. Hodson and I. Maher, "The Open Method as a New Mode of Governance: The Case of Soft Economic Policy Coordination' (2001) 39 Journal ofCommon Market Studies730-732.
137. See CD e La Porte and P. Pochet (eds.), Building Social Europe through the Open Method of Co-ordination(Brussels: P.I.E.-Peter Lang, 2002);
138. J. Zeidin et al. (eds.), The Open Method of Co-ordination in Action The European Employment and Social Inclusion Strategies, (Brussels: Peter Lang, 2005).
139. For a detailed study of benchmarking in immigration, see H. Entzinger and R. Biezcveld, Benchmarking in Immigrant Integration, European Research Centre on Migration and Ethnic Relations (ERCOMER), August 2003, at: 〈http://www.epim.info/documents/ Benchmarking%20in%20Immigrant%20Integration.pdf〉;.
140. Ibidem, pp. 38 et seq.
141. Ibidem, p. 39.
142. Ibidem, p. 41.
143. Ibidem, p. 43.
144. See A. Renda, 'Getting EU impact assessment right', European Voice, 27 October- 2 November 2005, p. 21;
145. for an analysis of problems concerning impact assessment and subsidiarity, see G. Davies, 'Subsidiarity: The Wrong Idea, In the Wrong Place, At the Wrong Time' (2006) 43(1) Common Market Law Review76.
146. See B. Bogusz, op. cit., supra, note 90, p. 229.
147. See C. Joppke and E. Morawska, Towards Assimilation and Citizenship in Liberal Nation-States(Basingstoke: Palgrave 2003).
148. See K. Groenendijk, 'Legal Concepts of Integration in EU Migration Law' (2004) 6(2) European Journal of Migration and Law113.
149. See D. Trubek, P. Cottrell, and M. Nance 'Soft Law,' 'Hard Law,' and European Integration: Toward a Theory of Hybridity, Jean Monnet Working Paper 02/05, at: http://www.jeanmonnetprogram.org/papers/05/050201.pdf, 23.
150. See Article 51 of the EU Charter now Article 11-111.
151. O. De Schutter and S. Deakin (eds.), op. cit., supra, note 109, p. 295.
152. See Case C-159/90 Society for the Protection of Unborn Children Ireland Ltd v. Stephen Grogan and others[2001] ECR I-4685. In this case the ECJ declared that it was not competent to decide on the matter since the distribution of such flyers did not fall within the ambit of freedom of services.
153. O. De Schutter and S. Deakin (eds.), op. cit., supra, note 109, p. 303.
154. See G. de Búrca, op. cit., supra, note 109, p. 271.
155. See Article 111-267(4) CT.
156. See K. Armstrong, The Open Method of Coordination and Fundamental Rights: A Critical Appraisal, Draft Paper for Discussion at the 'Fundamental Rights and Reflexive Governance' Seminar, Columbia Law School, NY, 4th November 2005, p. 15, at: http://eucenter.wisc.edu/OMC/Papei-s/Rights/armstrong.pdf.
157. See, supra, infra, Introduction.
158. See Commission Communication on a Proposal for a Council Decision establishing the European Fund for the Integration of Third-country nationals fir the period 2007-2013 as part of the General programme 'Solidarity and Management of Migration Flows'COM (2005) 123 final. The framework programme will establish financial solidarity mechanisms (Funds) covering four areas: a. controls and surveillance of external borders ('integrated border management'), visa policy; b. return of third country nationals illegally residing in the EU; c. integration of legally residing third country nationals; d. asylum (building upon the existing European Refugee Fund.
159. See H. Urth, 'Building a Momentum for the Integration of Third Country Nationals in the European Union' (2005) 7(2) European Journal of Migration and Law175.
160. See K. Armstrong, op. cit., supra, note 146, p. 16.
161. See O. De Schutter and S. Deakin (eds.), op. cit., supra, note 109, p. 336.
162. See, supra, infra, section 2.