International refugee law, in particular the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, has been accorded an exceptionally strong role in the framework for EU asylum policies. By virtue of EU primary law, it was established as a yardstick for secondary EU refugee law and its application by EU member states. As a consequence of this, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has the power to interpret provisions of international refugee law. In fact, it has become the first international court actually interpreting the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol. Expectations that this institutional setting would boost international refugee law through the strong framework of the EU were rising high after the establishment of the legal framework for EU refugee policies. More than twelve years after the adoption of the first asylum law instruments under EU law, and more than seven years after the first judgments were handed down, it is time for an assessment of how the Court has been dealing with the potential of applying and possibly shaping international refugee law. After having examined the institutional framework and its inherent limitations on further shaping international refugee law, the article provides an analysis of the Court's practice. While, after a rather slow start, a significant number of refugee law cases have been reaching the Court more recently, a review of the judgments adopted so far shows that the Court is not systematically taking up the international refugee law angle but rather is limiting itself to dealing with the EU law provisions in the sense of a self-contained regime. The frequent absence of discussion of international refugee law, difficulties in identifying the arguments decisive for the rulings of the Court, and certain ambiguities in the rulings may be explained to an extent by certain characteristics of the CJEU. In particular, the character of preliminary ruling procedures as defining the interpretation of a certain EU provision in a general manner for an unlimited number of cases may call for particular caution in the rulings of the Court. Moreover, the double function as a constitutional as well as an administrative court may motivate the Court to try and balance out the rights of individuals with the interest in an effective functioning of EU legal instruments. As a result, however, there is the danger of (possibly unconscious) divergences in interpretations under EU law and international law. Moreover, in the current way of functioning, the potential of the CJEU for shaping international refugee law remains unused to an important extent. In addition to a change of approach on the part of the CJEU itself, the role foreseen by EU primary law for the 1951 Convention could be further strengthened by accession of the EU to the 1951 Convention and by giving an expert role before the Court to UNHCR as the organisation that has been accorded the expert role under the 1951 Convention. © The Author (2015). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

[No Keywords available]

social justice refugee European Union international law Europe asylum seeker institutional framework