And again Green light had two legal advisors on site.
The legal advisors came this week on two dates, so that they an talk to each group separately. The first gathering procures general information about asylum and migration.
The information and the content didn’t differ very much from the gathering during the first workshop. But because it was already known, what the lawyers would talks with the participants about, a proper preparation on behalf of the participants could be organized more properly.
Anahita, on eof the project coordinators, and the only one having her expertise on the European asylum system within the Green light team in Venice, was able to jump in anytime the infotmation became too theoretical and general.
“There is a big discrepancy between law as it is supposed to be, and the pragtical implementation of law”, she stated. “It is always good to have information, but if the information lacks pragmatism the information is just useless and plainly not applicable for real life issues.”
Soon the lawyers were able to adapt to the needs the participants had, and they were able to translate certain information in a way, that it became useful.
Eventually a discussion arose about the different approaches of the countries within the European Union towards asylum regulations. On the first sight it seems as if the countries within the European Union would implement their asylum law in a very same way. This is not the case. In fact, the countries implement the regulations about the European asylum extremely different. This effects the real opportunities of asylum seekers tremendously.