Članek Neže Kogovšek Šalamon iz Mirovnega inštituta objavljen v Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative law.
“The paper addresses the question of the principle of solidarity in the fields of asylum and migration within the context of accession negotiations between the European Union and the candidate countries for EU membership. When candidate countries fulfil the membership conditions, it is expected that they will share the values of solidarity, mutual assistance, and burden sharing in the fields of asylum and migration to the detriment of state sovereignty. The paper is based on the hypothesis that solidarity in the field of asylum and migration has not been discussed within the enlargement process, meaning that the new Member States were not aware of the concrete forms this principle could have taken in the future. This hypothesis was tested on three case studies by analysing the accession documents of one candidate country from each of the three enlargement processes (Slovenia, Bulgaria and Croatia). The paper concludes by showing that with agreeing to the EU treaties, its solidarity clause and the majority vote rules, either as Member States or candidates, the states undertook the duty to transpose obligations in the fields of asylum and migration even if they did not agree with them.”