The european union's securitization of migration between the protection of borders and the preservation of fundamental rights
The european union's securitization of migration between the protection of borders and the preservation of fundamental rights

Summary/Abstract: The securitisation of migration in the European Union represents a paradigm shift in migration management, in which migration is increasingly treated as a security issue rather than a social, humanitarian, or economic phenomenon. Based on the theoretical framework of the Copenhagen School of security studies, specifically the works of Barry Buzan and Ole Wæver, the theory of securitisation explains how politicians construct migration as a threat to the state's existence and therefore deem it necessary to take exceptional measures. In the context of the EU, this shift in discourse has led to the expansion of border control measures and cooperation. This development is also evident in the institutionalisation of agencies such as Frontex, the externalisation of border control through agreements with third countries, and the development of integrated border management strategies. The migration crisis of 2015-2016 further reinforced this trend, where irregular migration was increasingly linked to terrorism, organised crime, and social unrest. As a result, migration management is increasingly integrated into the EU’s internal security framework. However, securitisation also creates normative challenges. The EU’s legal framework is founded on the principle of protecting fundamental rights, as enshrined in documents such as the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Policies of deterrence and management, such as detention conditions, fast-track asylum procedures, and push-back policies, have raised concerns about proportionality, non-refoulement, and access to international protection. These practices raise significant concerns under ECtHR jurisprudence, particularly in light of cases such as Hirsi Jamaa v. Italy, which established that human rights obligations extend to extraterritorial migration-control operations. A multidisciplinary approach to the issue shows that securitisation, while possibly increasing the state’s capacity to control borders, may also compromise the EU’s normative foundation as a community of law and human rights. A viable migration policy must therefore rebalance the relationship between security and rights, ensuring that border control policies are developed within a strong framework of accountability and transparency.

• Details
• Contents