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

VATANDAŞLIK, GĞ Ç, MÜLTECI VE YABANCIlAR HUKUKUNDAKi GÜNCEL GEL İŞMELERrecail Erdemir and Vasta's 'primary social relations'), may not be ARTI(Lf Byaccepted as credible. 32PRAISH SilAHAdvocate General Geelhoed took the view in his Opinionin Tum and Dar; that the rules governing the entry of Turkishnationais to the territory of the Member States 'may be adaptedor made more restrictive by the member states in the light oftheir socio-economic and demographic interests. 133 The ECJ heid,however, that the standstill provision prohibited the introductionagainst Turkish nationals intending to establish themselves inbusiness of any new restrictions on the exercise of freedom ofestablishment, including those relating to the substantive and/orprocedural conditions goveming first admissian into the territoryof that Member State. it went on to state that the provisior ı didnot contain any restrictions on its scope so as to exclude thoserefused refugee status, and the fact that the applicants had madeunsuccessful asylum applications before their entry clearanceapplications could not be regarded as constitutingfraud or abuseof rights.This case extends the principle of Savaş in that the standstillprovision now appiies also to those who apply to enter and notjust those who have already been admitted to the territory ofthe Member State. It therefore clearly applies to those who,like the applicants, have been refused entry as refugees or areawaiting the outcome of their asylum or any other application,and is therefore of potential importance to a larger numberof Turkish citizens. Giyen the difficulties of otherwise securingentry for Turkish citizens applying from abroad, the rum andDari judgment should also have an impact upon the way in whichapplications by thern are processed. Unlike the rules for workers,the application of the standstill ciause, and therefore the 1972business Immigration Rules, does not presuppose prior lawfulentry and being part of the labour force of the Member State.32 See again R (Kenan Temiz) v Secretary of State for the Home Department[2006] EWHC 2450 (Admin) for such distrustful treatment.See para. 59 of the Advocate General's Opinion in Turn.319