asylum shopping

{{Short description|Practice of seeking asylum in several states}}

{{Immigration sidebar}}

Asylum shopping is a term for the practice by some asylum seekers of applying for asylum in several states or seeking to apply in a particular state after traveling through other states.{{cite journal|doi=10.1093/jrs/feaa034|title=Double-edged risk: Unaccompanied minor refugees (UMRs) in Sweden and their search for safety |year=2020 |last1=Horning |first1=Amber |last2=Jordenö |first2=Sara V. |last3=Savoie |first3=Nicole |journal=Journal of Refugee Studies |volume=33 |issue=2 |pages=390–415 }} It is used mostly in the context of the European Union and the Schengen Area, but has also been used by the Federal Court of Canada.{{cite web|url=http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/A/AsylumShopping.aspx|title=Asylum Shopping Definition|work=duhaime.org|access-date=2010-12-18|archive-date=2018-06-25|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180625213500/http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/A/AsylumShopping.aspx|url-status=dead}}

Refugees and asylum-seekers are protected by international convention under the principle of non-refoulement, which establishes that a country cannot force someone seeking refuge to return to a country of origin if the person is likely to be persecuted there. The Dublin Convention covering the European Union stipulates that asylum seekers are returned to the country where their entry into the union was first recorded, and where they were first fingerprinted. Another objective of this policy is to prevent asylum seekers in orbit, i.e., to prevent the continual transfer of asylum seekers between countries trying to get others to accept them.{{cite web|url=http://www.irishrefugeecouncil.ie/factsheets/dublinconvention4.html |title=Fact Sheet on the Dublin Convention |accessdate=20 February 2005 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20050319010056/http://www.irishrefugeecouncil.ie/factsheets/dublinconvention4.html |archivedate=19 March 2005 }}{{cite journal|author=MOORE, K.|date=2013|accessdate=27 September 2020|title="Asylum Shopping" in the Neoliberal Social Imaginary|journal=Media, Culture & Society|volume=35|issue=3|pages=348–365|doi=10.1177/0163443712472090|s2cid=143866492 |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0163443712472090 |url-access=subscription}} One of the objectives of the Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters is to prevent so-called "asylum shopping."[https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200405/ldselect/ldeucom/84/8407.htm#n35 Select Committee on European Union Tenth Report], House of Lords

European law, the Dublin Regulation, does not require that asylum seekers have their asylum claim registered in the first country they arrive in,{{cite news|title=Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person|url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32013R0604#d1e1042-31-1|author=European Parliament|work=Eur-Lex|date=26 June 2013|accessdate=4 April 2019}} but that the decision of the first EU country they apply in is the final decision in all EU countries. However, among some asylum seekers, fingerprinting and registration is vehemently resisted in countries that are not asylum-seeker friendly. For example, some people seek to apply for asylum in Germany and Sweden where a more serious approach to welfare and integration support is taken,{{cite news|title=Out of Syria, Into a European Maze|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/30/world/middleeast/out-of-syria-into-a-european-maze.html?_r=0|work=The New York Times| date=29 November 2013 |accessdate=4 December 2013| last1=Yardley | first1=Jim | last2=Pianigiani | first2=Gaia }} and fundamental rights are more likely to be met.{{Cite web|title=Human rights court deals blow to EU asylum system|url=https://euobserver.com/justice/31681|access-date=2021-10-15|website=EUobserver|date=21 January 2011 |language=en}}

Some asylum seekers reportedly burned their fingers to avoid fingerprint record control in Italy so that they could apply for asylum in a different country.{{cite news|title=Dublin regulation leaves asylum seekers with their fingers burnt|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/oct/07/dublin-regulation-european-asylum-seekers|work=The Guardian|location=London|date=7 October 2011|accessdate=5 December 2014}} The fingerprint record, known as the Eurodac system, is used to intercept multiple or false asylum claims.{{cite web|title=Q&A: Migrants and asylum in the EU|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-24583286|work=BBC News|date=3 March 2016|accessdate=5 December 2014}} In Ireland, two-thirds of asylum seekers whose applications failed were found to be already known to the British border authorities, a third of the time under a different nationality, such as Tanzanians claiming to be fleeing persecution in Somalia.{{cite news|title=Two-thirds of failed asylum seekers had used false identities|url=https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/twothirds-of-failed-asylum-seekers-had-used-false-identities-26855916.html|author=Brady, Tom|work=Independent.ie|date=21 May 2012|accessdate=5 December 2014}}

==See also==

• Asylum seeker
• Chain migration
• Economic results of migration
• Forum shopping
• Gaming the system
• Illegal immigration
• Non-refoulement
• Roxham Road