In the summer of 2015, the states had refused a decision by the EU, which provided for the redistribution of asylum seekers to the EU member states. The objections of the three countries that refugee reception was “hindering the maintenance of public order and the protection of domestic security” were rejected by her.
In 2017, the European Commission issued a complaint against the three countries, the news agency dpa reported. “In a clear emergency situation, both the Member States at the external borders and the potential resettlement Member States were responsible for the proper implementation of this mechanism,” the European Court of Justice quoted the lawyer’s opinion.
Sharpston stressed that it was then necessary to “comply with the principle of solidarity”. For other states that had “problems with their relocation obligations”, they would have been “temporarily suspended”. A disregard for the duties “is a dangerous first step towards the collapse of a rule of law-bound, orderly and structured society”. It is subject to the “principle of sincere cooperation”.
The report is not binding on the European Court of Justice. It acts as a proposal for a decision. However, the advice is often followed by the Court. In the case of the three Eastern European states, a judgment is expected only in a few weeks.