Prueba, estándares y cargas de la prueba en el sistema de protección europeo: ¿un nuevo campo para teóricos de la prueba?
Descargas
Resumen
El trabajo presenta los principales rasgos probatorios implícitos en las directivas y jurisprudencia europea sobre el reconocimiento de la protección internacional. Se centra, en primer lugar, en los desafíos planteados a la toma de decisiones judiciales por la ausencia de un sistema de prueba europeo unitario, por la falta de pruebas en los juicios y por los conflitos de intereses en juego. El texto destaca, entonces, la connotación “subjetiva” de la prueba de protección internacional y la inserta en el debate sobre estándares de prueba.Palabras clave
prueba, asilo, estándar de prueba, CEAS, ACNURCitas
Baldinger, D. (2015). Vertical Judicial Dialogues in Asylum Cases: Standards on Judicial Scrutiny and Evidence in International and European Asylum Law. Brill NjHoff.
Black, R. (1994). Livelihoods under Stress: A Case Study of Refugee Vulnerability in Greece. Journal of Refugee Studies, 7(4), pp. 360-377.
Blommaert, J. (2001). Investigating Narrative Inequality: African Asylum Seekers’ Stories in Belgium. Discourse & Society, 12(4), pp. 513-449.
Calamandrei, P. (1965). Opere giuridiche (vol. I: Problemi generali del diritto e del processo). RomaTre Press. http://romatrepress.uniroma3.it/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Opere-giuridiche- %E2%80%93-Volume-I-%E2%80%93-Problemi-generali-del-diritto-e-del-processo.pdf.
Canale, D. & Tuzet, G. (2019). La giustificazione della decisione giudiziale. Giappichelli.
Costello, C. & Hancox, E. (2016). The Recast Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32 / EU: Caught between the Stereotypes of the Abusive Asylum-Seeker and the Vulnerable Refugee. In V. Chetail, P. de Bruycker, & F. Maiani (eds), Reforming the Common European Asylum System—The New European Refugee Law (p. 376). Brill-Nijhoff.
Dei Vecchi, D. (2016). La prueba judicial como conocimiento: una caracterización poco persuasiva. In J. Ferrer Beltrán & C. Vázquez (eds.), Debatiendo con Taruffo. Marcial Pons.
EASO. (2018a). Evidence and credibility assessment in the context of the Common European Asylum System, Luxemburgo, Publications Office of the European Union.
EASO. (2018b). Conditions for the recognition of international protection (Directive 2011/95/EU)—A legal analysis.
European Commission. (2020). Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common procedure for international protection in the Union and repealing Directive 2013/32/EU, 23.09.2020, COM (2020) 611 final.
European Migration Network. (2014). The Organization of Reception Facilities for Asylum Seekers in different Member States.
Ferrer, J. (2005). Prueba y verdad en el derecho. Marcial Pons.
Ferrer, J. (2006). Legal Proof and Fact Finders’ Beliefs. Legal Theory, 12, pp. 293-314.
Ferrer, J. (2007). La valoración racional de la prueba. Marcial Pons.
Ferrer, J. (2019). Prueba y racionalidad de las decisiones judiciales. Marcial Pons.
Ferrer, J. (2021). Prueba sin convicción. Estándares de prueba y debido proceso. Marcial Pons.
Ferrer, J. & Tuzet, G. (2018). Sulla necessità degli standard di prova per la giustificazione delle decisioni giudiziali. Diritto & Questioni Pubbliche, XVIII(2), pp. 455-472.
Gama, R. (2020). En búsqueda de El Dorado: La concepción racional de la prueba y la formulación de estándares de prueba precisos y objetivos. Revus, 43.
Gascón Abellán, M. (1999). Los hechos en el derecho. Marcial Pons.
Gaudio, R.M. & Bacchio E. (2019). La valutazione medico legale. In M. G. Bernardini (ed.), Migranti con disabilità. Rappresentazioni, politiche, diritti (p. 147-159). Jovene.
Gonzalez Lagier, D. (2018). Tres modos de razonar sobre hechos (y algunos problemas sobre la prueba judicial planteados a partir de ellos). In C. Vázquez (ed.), Hechos y razonamiento evidential (p. 17-43). Editorial CEJI.
Herlihy, J. & Turner, S. W. (2009). The Psychology of Seeking Protection. International Journal of Refugee Law, 21(2), pp. 1-16.
Hungarian Helsinki Committee. (2013). Credibility Assessment in Asylum Procedure, A Multidisciplinary Training Manual (vol. 1). https://helsinki.hu/wp-content/uploads/Credibility-Assessment-in-Asylum-Procedures-CREDO-manual.pdf.
Hungarian Helsinki Committee. (2015). Credibility Assessment in Asylum Procedure, A Multidisciplinary Training Manual (vol. 2). https://helsinki.hu/wp-content/uploads/CREDO-training-manual-2nd-volume-online-final.pdf.
IARLJ. (2013). Assessment of Credibility in Refugee and Subsidiary Protection Claims under the EU Qualification Directive, Judicial Criteria and Standards, Progetto CREDO, https://helsinki.hu/wp-content/ uploads/Credo_Paper_March2013-rev1.pdf
IARLJ. (2014). Due process standards for the use of country of origin information (COI) in administrative and judicial procedures, https://www.iarlj.org/images/stories/Tunis_conference/WPPapers/COI.pdf
IARLJ. (2016). A Structured Approach to the Decision Making Process in Refugee and other International Protection Claims, https://www.iarmj.org/iarlj-documents/2017_publications/IARLJ_guidechartCOIJul17.pdf.
Laudan, L. (2005). Por qué un estándar de prueba subjetivo y ambiguo no es un estándar. Doxa, 28, pp. 95-113.
Laudan, L. (2006). Truth, Error, and Criminal Law. An Essay in Legal Epistemology. Cambridge University Press.
Metselaar, E. J. (2017). The motivation of the Dutch credibility assessment in return decisions and its judicial review in the light of relevant standards in international and EU law (Treball de fi de màster). LLM. DOI:10.13140/RG.2.2.24323.91688.
Minniti, L. (2020). La valutazione di credibilità del richiedente asilo tra diritto internazionale, dell’UE e nazionale. Questione giustizia, Rubrica Diritti senza confini, ASGI, 21 de enero de 2020, https:// www.asgi.it/notizie/la-valutazione-di-credibilita-richiedente-asilo-tra-diritto-internazionale-dellue-e-nazionale/.
Ricaurte, C. (2019). Argumentación y teoría de la prueba en el mundo latino. Un punto de partida. (Tesis doctoral). Universidad de Alicante, València.
Sucar, G. & Cerdio, J. (2017). Derecho y verdad (vol. 4). Tirant lo Blanch.
Taruffo, M. (1992). La prova dei fatti giuridici: nozioni generali. Giuffré.
Taruffo, M. (2009). La semplice verità. Laterza.
Tuzet, G. (2006). La prima inferenza: l’abduzione di C. S. Peirce fra scienza e diritto. Giappichelli.
Tuzet, G. (2016). Philosophy of Legal Proof. Giappichelli.
Tuzet, G. (2020). Assessment Criteria or Standards of Proof? An Effort in Clarification. Artificial Intelligence & Law, 28(1), p. 99-109.
Twining, W. (1982). The Rationalist Tradition of Evidence Scholarship. In E. Campell & L. Waller (eds.), Well and Truly Tried (p. 211-249). The Law Book Company.
Twining, W. (2020). La prueba como un ámbito multidisciplinar: ¿de qué manera puede el derecho y su estudio contribuir a esta empresa? In J. Ferrer Beltrán & C. Vázquez (eds.), El razonamiento probatorio en el proceso judicial: Un encuentro entre diferentes tradiciones. Marcial Pons.
UNHCR. (1998). Note on Burden and Standard of Proof in Refugee Claims.
UNHCR. (2002). Guidelines on International Protection No. 1: Gender-Related Persecution Within the Context of Article 1A (2) of the 1951 Convention and / or its 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, 7 May 2002, HCR/GIP/02/01.
UNHCR. (2006). Guidelines on International Protection No. 7: The Application of Article 1A (2) of the 1951 Convention and/or 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees to Victims of Trafficking and Persons at Risk of Being Trafficked, 7 April 2006, HCR/GIP/06/07.
UNHCR. (2009). Guidelines on International Protection No. 8: Child Asylum Claims under Articles 1 (A) 2 and 1 (F) of the 1951 Convention and/or 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees, 22 December 2009, HCR/GIP/09/08.
UNHCR. (2010). The Heightened Risk Identification Tool (User Guide).
UNHCR. (2012). Guidelines on International Protection No. 9: Claims to Refugee Status based on Sexual Orientation and/or Gender Identity within the context of Article 1A (2) of the 1951 Convention and/or its 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees, 23 October 2012, HCR/GIP/12/01.
UNHCR. (2013). Beyond proof: Credibility Assessment in EU Asylum Systems.
UNHCR. (2014). The Heart of the Matter: Assessing Credibility when Children Apply for Asylum in the European Union, CREDO report.
UNHCR. (2015). Annotated Comments to Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and Council of 26 June 2013 laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection (recast) To assist with transposition and implementation.
UNHCR. (2019). Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.33115/udg_bib/qf.i3.22737Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2022 Elena Marchese
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.