Thursday, March 10, 2011

Ruiz Zambrano: Will The Real Expert Please Stand Up

Today in The Hague "Legal avocado" Jeremy Bierbach @basilok is attending the European expert meeting on the Ruiz Zambrano ruling which could
"potentially have huge implications on all ministries in The Hague"
Paul Streumer, president of the most active dutch immigration forum "", was told that the meeting was mostly for government officials and that he was not welcome.

In the age of crowdsourcing, cocreation and collective intelligence I would assume government officials would engage experts at buitenlandsepartner and other online immigration fora or at least acknowledge the incredibly valuable contribution of the and community to the debate.

Which begs the question which "experts" were invited? Judges from Dutch courts that have consistently violated the fundamental principle which led to the Ruiz Zambrano ruling? Officials at the Dutch immigration service?

Charles Forelle, Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones Team in Brussels, makes a very valuable observation when he writes:
"Gerardo Ruiz Zambrano has been at it for nearly 12 years bouncing between the Brussels Office des Étrangers and various ministries, directorates-general, councils, courts and tribunals. Granted, his case is a wee bit complicated. But it provides, in a roundabout way, an interesting look at jurisprudence of citizenship in Europe and the reach of the EU’s authority."
Ruiz Zambrano makes judges at courts across Europe, people like H.G. Lubberdink, T.M.A. Claessens, H.G. Sevenster that teach European law at prestigious universities, look like amateurs.

Dutch members of parliament have allready asked several not soo bright questions relating to the Ruiz Zambrano case. For example Raymond Knops(CDA) asking if the legal status of the parents in the EU member-state would have made any difference in the Ruiz Zambrano case. Parliament is clearly not a good place to look for expertise.

For expertise we should turn to bloggers like Max Steinbeis, who cuts to the core explaining the significance of the Ruiz Zambrano case when he writes:
"Like in the Roman empire now every citizen of an EU-memberstate, from Lissabon to Bukarest, can hold up his juridical status as citizen of the EU and tell the national authorities: Civis europaeus sum!"
Walter Blotscher, Denmark, gets even closer to the heart of the matter when he writes:
"E.U. citizenship was introduced by the 1992 Maastricht Treaty; everyone who is a national of a Member State is automatically a European citizen. It is for the individual Member State to decide for itself about nationality; but once it has so decided, then the rules about European citizenship apply. In a series of landmark cases, the ECJ has interpreted those rules very broadly, on the basis (repeated in Ruiz Zambrano) that "citizenship of the Union is intended to be the fundamental status of nationals of the Member States". In particular, Member States have to ensure that the rights of E.U. citizens are real rights, not illusionary ones."
Liam Thornton, Ireland, writes
"this judgment will have a profound effect on immigration laws in all Member States."
As stated in the Ruiz Zambrano ruling, The Court has stressed several times:
"that citizenship of the Union is intended to be the fundamental status of nationals of the member States"
Karen Berkeley, Irish Immigration Blog writes:
"The ECJ’s reasoning can be applied to all domestic law cases whereby Union citizens are seeking residence permission for their family members or dependants within their own national State."

Johann Morri, ImmigrationProf Blog writes:
"More generally, the European Court could be a landmark case on the significance, content ant theory of citizenship. Its reasoning may inspire other national or international courts faced with the following question: what does citizenship mean? What are the “core” rights and duties stemming from the status of citizen, and without which citizenship is a meaningless concept, deprived of its practical significance?"
UK discussion forum on Free Movement on the Ruiz Zambrano ruling
Another discussion forum talking about this topic.

further reading:
Interview in german with Prof. Dr. Daniel Thym about Ruiz Zambrano.
Dutch reaction of Defence for Children.
Dutch reaction of Luscuere De Jong Wassenaar advocaten.
Dutch reaction Everaert advocaten.
Dutch Thailand Forum has also noticed this important story.
Dutch Linkedin Group "Vreemdelingenrecht" is discussing the Ruiz Zambrano case.
University of Maastricht article on Ruiz Zambrano case by Anja Wiesbrock.

To translate blog content click here

Blog that collects all info about equadorian immigrants also mentions the Ruiz Zambrano case. The music won't be translated.

Romanian blog mentions Ruiz Zambrano case as well, but doesn't add it's own interpretation.

Danish website quotes Peter Vesterdorf, jurist and EU expert at the Craft Council:
"Verdict affirms that the rights of citizenship implies the right to family life."

Today (16-03-2011) we read that this same Peter Vesterdorf (one of Denmark's leading EU experts) is planning to present a case of treaty violation to the EU commission as well as reapplying for family reunification for his Russian wife:
“The Zambrano ruling has established that EU citizens have the right to live anywhere in the EU with their family, regardless of their family's nationality,” he said. “It doesn't make sense to interpret the union treaty paragraph one way for adults and another way for children. They're all citizens of the union.”
A French immigration forum makes us aware of the link to the video of the judges pronouncing the historic Ruiz Zambrano ruling.

Tunesian forum has also discovered the Ruiz Zambrano ruling.

A Dutch court has ruled a case in which a reference to the Ruiz Zambrano was made.

English blogpost on children rights and nationality in which the Ruiz Zambrano case is discussed.


step21 said...

There is also:
A ruling by a german court refering to the Zambrano case. Basically they are saying that while in principle they accept the ruling of the ECJ, this does not mean unconditional application. In this case no interim relief from deportation was granted mainly because the court argued that the Zambrano case still allows for public policy exceptions (the defendant had committed an armed robbery a while ago and was incarcerated still incarcerated for this), additionally it didn't sit well with the court that contrary to Zambrano the defendant had not lived or had contact with his child for almost 10 years. For this the court also referred to the argument s by the AG that Zambrano had been such a fine citizen and so on.

Vincent Harris said...

thanks for your help in updating this list of related Ruiz Zambrano links.