TORKiYE BAROLAR BiRÙ G%i. il - Türkiye Barolar Birliği Yayınları

AKrUELLE ENIWICKLL!NGEN 1M STMTSANGEMÖRIGKEITS -, AUSL4NDER- UND FLÜ(HTLINGSRE(HJARr ı cLF BY lntroductionPRASH SHAHAremarkablefeatureoftheimplemefltationOftheobligationsunder the Ankara Agreement between the EEC and Turkey (1963)and its Additional Brussels Protocol (1970) within the EU's legalorder and the legal orders of the Member States 15 the leadingrole taken, and the high degree of activism demonstrated,by the ECJ. Without its contribution to the development ofjurisprudence regarding the obligations of Member Statesvis--vis Turkish citizen migrants, the Ankara Agreement andProtocol could weil have remained a dead letter. The ECJ's roleis ali the more important giyen the changed nature, since theearlier days of labour recruitment and Iow unemployment, ofthe imrnigration question across European countries, especialiyin the 'old' EU Member States, many of which have alreadyexperienced signiflcant and continuing immigration from othercountries, not least from Turkey. Britain has also changed itsgeneral approach to immigration signiflcantly in recent years toa much more control-minded paradigm, a fact which impacts onrelatively recent migrants from Turkey. The overali EU approachmirrors the politically charged nature of the immigrationquestion through the adoption of restrictive legislation underthe Schengen aquis, which candidate countries, includingTurkey,must also now approximate towards (Çiçekli 2006, Kiri şci 2007).However, once the ECJ makes ruhngs in the context of theAnkara Agreement and Protocol it is by no means a gi yen, whenapplied within the British or other Member States' legal systems,that such domestic implementation faithfully reflects the spiritof the ECJ's decisions. As this chapter demonstrates in the caseof Britain, other agendas creep into the domestic realisation ofthe rights of Turkish citizen migrants. This reflects the scepticismwhich socio-legal and legal pluralist scholars have expressedabout adjudication as a flnai means of conflict resolution. AsChiba (1995: 72) says:"adjudication itseif forms a process of social conflict, thoughwith the function to modify some phases of a sociai conflict insome way or other as an attempt to settle it but so often leaving300