Administrative Jurisdiction in Asylum Matters – A Comparative Study between French and Qatari Laws
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Abstract
The following article seeks to explore the organization of administrative functions with relevance to asylum-related matters in the Qatari legal system. In comparative law, legal regimes vary as to the authority, which possess the final words in issues of asylum. In some legal regimes, such as France, this authority is assigned to a specialized public institution the French Office for the Protection of Refugees was established. Other regimes, like Qatar, have opted to confer such power to the ministry of interior.
With regard to asylum-related substantive competencies, they are distributed within the administrative structure of the competent authority. In French law for example, these competencies are divided between two authorities, the first is a decision making power which is represented by the Board of Directors of the French Office for the Protection of Refugees and the second authority is the implementing power which is represented by the Director General. In Qatar, substantive competences are divided among several administrative bodies working within the Ministry of interior.
Metrics
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
AsylumJurisdictionPublic FoundationFrench Office for Refugee ProtectionSafe Countries
Blodie Boublil – Laure Wolmark, Vulnérabilité, soin et accueil des demandeurs d’asile, La revue des droits de l’homme, 13-2018.
Caroline Lantero, La notion de groupe social au sens de la convention de Genève dans la jurisprudence français, AJDA, 2013, p.2369.
Catherine - Amélie, De la réadmission des demandeurs d’asile, AJDA, 2013, P2380.
C.E, Le juge administratif et le droit d’asile, Les dossiers thématiques de conseil d’Etat, mis en ligne- Janvier -2016, p13. https://www.conseil-etat.fr.
Christophe Pouly, contentieux de l’asile, Répertoire de contentieux administratif, Dalloz, octobre 2019, n°32.
–––. Les garanties procédurale dans le nouveau régime d’asile européen commun, A.J.D.A, 2013, p.2358.
Didier Truchet, Droit administratif, Paris, PUF, 2015.
Etien Fatome, Etablissemen public et service public, AJDA, 1997, P96.
Gérard Marcou, La notion juridique de régulation, A.J.D.A, 2006, P356
Gille.J.Gualiemi – Genviève Koubi – Martine Long, Droit du service public, LGDJ, Paris
Jacques Cheviller, Le service publics, PUF, Paris, 2012.
–––. Le statut des autorités administratifs indépendants: harmonisation ou diversification, RFDA, 2010, p.897.
Janin Stern, La cour national du droit d’asile, une opportunité pour les magistrats honoraires, le nouveau pouvoir judiciaire, n°406, mars, 2014, p.25.
Jean Francois Lachaume – Héléne Paulét – Clotide Deffiger, Droit des services publics, Lexis Nexis, Paris, 2018.
Jean Waline, Droit administratif, Dalloz, Paris, 2016.
Louis Feilhès, Le concept d'opération complexe, RFDA, 2020.
Pierre – Laurent Frier - Jacques Petit, Droit administratif, LGDJ, Paris, 2019.
Pierre Serrand, Droit administratif, Les actions administratives, T1, PUF, Paris, 2017.
Serge Salma, Contentieux de l’asile, L’âge de la maturité ? AJDA, 2013, p2351.
Stéphan Braconnier, Droit des services publics, P.U.F, Paris, 2007.
Yves Gaudemet, Droit administratif, LGDJ, Paris, 2012.