Natascha Zaun

Natascha Zaun conducts research on and teaches European and International Public Policy with a particular emphasis on asylum and migration policy. She brings together political science and legal perspectives on the creation and implementation of as well as changes in decisions on migration policy. Central to her research are the political and institutional conditions for migration and for the protection of refugees. She is thus interested, among other things, in how populism, scientific evidence, and independent courts influence migration policy decisions and what role national and international institutions play in the design of asylum policy. Her areas of research include European asylum policy, international cooperation, and reforms of global refugee regimes.

The Institutionalization of Judicial Independence and its Influence on Refugee Recognition: Studying the Cases of Poland and Austria

My project examines how the institutionalization of judicial independence influences the recognition of refugee status in Poland and Austria. The research thus far has shown that hostile public opinion on immigration is linked to reduced recognition. This is explained in part by the fact that political decision-makers can be pressured to demonstrate responsiveness towards voters. As non-majoritarian institutions, courts can provide protection for the rights of refugees by applying legal norms independently of public opinion and electoral preferences. This protective function can, however, be weakened if judicial independence itself is confronted with political pressure. The project therefore asks how changes in judicial independence influence the decisions of courts and the management of asylum, and through which mechanisms they shape the recognition of refugee status.
A quantitative analysis of the EU-28 shows that states with more independent courts have higher rates of recognizing asylum claims. Asylum administrations in political systems with an independent judiciary tend to make more liberal decisions as administrative bodies than those that are up against a less independent judiciary. My research project goes beyond this statistical connection through examining the underlying causal mechanisms based on a comparative analysis of Poland and Austria. Both cases are particularly suitable as migration in these countries has been the object of considerably political conflicts, even though the development trajectory of their judicial independence differs considerably.
In my examination of legal and policy documents, judicial decisions, interviews with experts, reports by nongovernmental organizations, press reports, and secondary data, the central questions is how parties react when democratic responsiveness comes into conflict with the rule of law and the protection of individual rights. Do judges and the individuals involved in the management of asylum follow a logic of appropriateness, in which judicial independence is internalized as a constitutive norm, or a logic of consequentiality, in which independence is understood as an external limitation on action?
By reconstructing these processes, the project intends to clarify the institutional and political conditions under which judicial independence strengthens the protection of refugees. It thus makes a contribution to research on the management of asylum, courts in migration policy, and judicial independence, in which institutional change is connected with the day-to-day decision-making practices of judges as well as administrative actors

2015 PhD in Social Sciences, University of Bremen/Bremen International Graduate School of Social Sciences, Bremen, Germany
2010 MA in Political Science, Public International Law, and Romance studies, University of Bonn, Germany
2007 BA (Licence) in Franco-German Cultural Relations, Université de Paris III – Sorbonne Nouvelle

Professor of Political Science, in particular Public Policy and Law, Leuphana University Lüneburg

“Externally Driven Integration in EU Migration Policy: Enabling Integration through Indiffer-ence, Undermining It through Conflictive Politicisation”. Journal of European Public Policy 33, no. 8 (2026): 2256–2283.
with Miriam Sorace. “Dimension-Specific Party and Public Opinion Responsiveness in the EU Immigration Acquis”. West European Politics (2026): 1–29.
with Martin Leroch and Eiko Thielemann. “Why courts are the life buoys of migrant rights: anti-immigrant pressure, variation in judicial independence, and asylum recognition rates”. Journal of European Public Policy 31, no. 5 (2024): 1206–1230.