By Marc Uhry , Fondation Abbé Pierre and Claire Zoccali, Lyon Bar
In recognising that the right to emergency accommodation is a fundamental freedom, administrative courts delineate its boundaries, drawing a distinction between the right holders liable to cite the state as negligent in court when this right is ignored and the others, those who are unable to claim this right.
For a long time, access to emergency accommodation, for those living in extreme hardship, was unconditional.
Then, gradually, during the first decade of the new millennium, the idea of subjecting this access to certain conditions was raised, as two forms of pressure came to
bear on the shoulders of the authorities concerned.
The first source of pressure prompting this change was the fact that the legal status of migrants was growing ever more complex. This led to an increase in the number
of people allowed to remain on French soil but unable either to work or to seek assistance from the usual solidarity mechanisms. As a result, these individuals had no
other option but to turn to the ‘unconditional emergency mechanisms’ for support. The number of temporary residence permits granted increased, authorising stays
of between 3 months and 1 year. At the same time, it became more difficult to obtain either permanent leave to remain or French nationality, the concept of natural entitlement dissolved and that of state discretion took its place.
For full article click here.
En francais clique ici.
