| Abstract: | The paper analyses a recent practice applied by the Greek asylumauthorities in the case of many asylum applicants who are returnedto Greece by another European Union Member State by virtue ofthe ‘Dublin-II’ Regulation. This practice consistsin interrupting the examination of their asylum claim on thegrounds that the applicants have arbitrarily abandoned theirplace of residence. Greek legislation provides for this actionin similar cases but was not used, up till recently, on casesof ‘Dublin’ returnees. The paper examines the reasonsthat led the Greek authorities to adopt this policy and itsfoundation in Greek asylum law and procedures, and challengesthe practice legally and politically. It argues that, in adoptingsuch a stance, Greece seems not only to go against the mainobjective of the Dublin-II Regulation (that an asylum applicationis examined once, and once only in the EU) but to contradictand undermine European Union policies on asylum, breaking theprinciple of good faith in its relations with its EU partners.In addition, it considers the possibility of similar problemsbeing repeated in other national legal orders. |
