ΑΛΛΗΛΕΓΓΥΗ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΕ: ΕΞΕΛΙΞΕΙΣ ΣΤΟ ΠΕΔΙΟ ΤΗΣ ΠΡΟΣΦΥΓΙΚΗΣ ΠΡΟΣΤΑΣΙΑΣ ΚΑΙ ΠΡΟΚΛΗΣΕΙΣ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΕ ΚΑΙ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΛΛΑΔΑ

Maria Daniella Marouda 51 the Treaties’ 18 . “Solidarity based on mutual trust” between Member States has been recognized by the ECJ as a general principle inferred from the nature of the Communities already since 1973 19 , whereas “a duty to cooperate” means taking any necessary short-term measures where the Community has not yet succeeded in establishing legislation in an area that a Treaty has mandated 20 . To date, how- ever, the relevant references and declarations remain largely a wish list 21 , or lead to technocratic, financial measures which are not necessarily linked to specific obligations (see the Asylum Migration Integration Fund (AMIF) 22 . What is therefore interesting is that although achieving a consensus on the exact content of solidarity has proved difficult in the EU Common asylum and immigra- tion policy, solidarity in emergency cases seems to be somewhat more achieva- ble, particularly when the emergency either affects a small number of Member 18. See European Parliament, Study on the Implementation of Article 80 TFEU on the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility including its financial implications between Member States in the field of border checks, asylum, immigration, 2011, p. 6 et seq, accessed at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/ join/2011/453167/IPOL-LIBE_ET(2011)453167_EN.pdf 19. See already in 1973, ECJ, Case 39-72 Judgment of the Court of 7 February 1973 Com- mission of the European Communities v Italian Republic. European Court Reports 1973 -00101, in para 25 and in 273. For more recent cases see on solidarity in the EU, see recent cases CJEU - Joined Cases C-643/15 and C-647/15 Slovak Republic and Hungary v Council of the European Union, 6 September 2017 and the interpretation of the notion by Advocate General Bot in the Opinion, delivered on 26 July 2017 (Cases C-643/15 and C-647/15 Slovak Republic, Hungary v Council of the European Union 20. See on Article 80 TFEU footnote18 p. 6 21. See Stockholm Program, ibid footnote9 para.6.2.2., p. 32. 2010/C 115/01. See also 3151st Justice and Home Affairs Council Meeting, Brussels, 8/03/2012, par.5 as well as relevant references to solidarity on asylum and migration in the following EU texts See European Commission, Communication on Enhanced Intra-EU Solidarity in the Field of Asylum: An EU Agenda for Better Responsibility-Sharing and More Mutual Trust, COM(2011) 835; European Parliament, Resolution of 11 September 2012 on Enhanced Intra-EU Solidarity in the Field of Asylum, (2012/2032(INI); Council of the European Union, Council Conclusions on a Common Framework for Genuine and Practical Soli- darity Towards Member States Facing Particular Pressures on their Asylum Systems, Including Through Mixed Migration Flows, Brussels, 3151st Justice and Home Affairs Council Meeting, March 2012. ; Council, ‘Council Conclusions on a Common Framework for genuine and practical solidarity towards Member States facing particular pressures on their asylum systems, CYELP 9 [2013] 1-14 11. 22. The Asylum and Migration Integration Fund, is a practical tool for solidarity through a financing program, which was not however considered as efficient, as it could not cover emergency needs on a sudden increase in the asylum requests. The Fund dispatches funding based on pre-determined criteria, “objective”, and cannot take into account specific needs of a certain member state a certain period, see the Communication from the Commission to the Council accompanying the proposal for the Emergency Support within the EU, Brussels, 2.3.2016 COM(2016) 116 final.