Asylum Report 2023

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

was no lack of a legal basis for the application of an alternative measure to detention (see also

here). Therefore, it dismissed the appeal of the Centre for the Registration of Foreigners of the

State Border Guard Service under the Ministry of the Interior.

Following another court ruling initiated by the Human Rights Monitoring Institute together with

the professional association of lawyers ReLex as one of the strategic cases, the Supreme

Administrative Court in Lithuania stated that according to the Law on the Legal Status of

Aliens, alternative measures to detention cannot last longer than 18 months. With this decision,

the court changed the practice of the courts of first instance, which allowed alternative

detention measures to be applied for a longer period than the maximum detention period by

law of 18 months. The court stated that such a maximum term, which is established for

detention, applies to all alternative measures, regardless of whether they amount to de facto

detention.

The Federal Council in Switzerland announced that it will not create a legal basis for the

introduction of electronic bracelets as an alternative to administrative detention in the Foreign

Nationals and Integration Act (FNIA).⁷⁵⁷ However, it proposed to include a legal basis allowing

third-country nationals to be subject to an obligation of presence.

In Malta, NGOs continued to call for alternatives to immigration detention.⁷⁵⁸

200

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

Section 4.9.

Access

to information

Effective access to information is a primary

Persons seeking international

constituent of procedural fairness.

protection need information on their

Applicants have the right to be informed so

situation in order to be able to fully

that:

communicate their protection needs

and personal circumstances and, in

they understand the different stages of

turn, have them comprehensively and

the process;

fairly assessed.

they know their rights and obligations in

each of these stages, and the possible

To ensure effective access to the

consequences of not complying or

asylum procedure, the recast APD

cooperating;

and the recast RCD oblige Member

the timeframe for each stage of the

States to ensure that applicants have

procedure is clearly communicated; and

access to free legal and procedural

they are aware of the means available to

information, for example on where

them to exercise their rights and fulfil

and how applications for international

their duties.

protection may be lodged or what

their rights and obligations are in

For applicants with pending cases, it is

reception. Obligations also include

crucial to receive information, because a

the provision of information to

lack of clarity can be a contributing factor to

potential applicants who are in

absconding and secondary movements.

detention facilities and at border

crossing points.

201

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

In 2022, EU+ countries continued to enhance the provision of information to asylum applicants

through digital innovations and improvements, such as new platforms and websites. In

addition to national authorities, civil society organisations continued to play an equally integral

role in facilitating access to information. Both national authorities and civil society

organisations increasingly made efforts to ensure applicants and beneficiaries of international

protection had access to information in a language that they understand. As such, content was

translated into several languages, with a special focus on having information available in

Ukrainian and Russian.

Specific groups of applicants may require tailored information for their situation and

circumstances. This continued to be the case for evacuees from Afghanistan and displaced

persons from Ukraine, which created a new information landscape. New information was also

developed for Russian nationals seeking protection.

4.9.1. Information on the asylum procedure

4.9.1.1. New initiatives by national authorities

Online resources

In 2022, national authorities continuously updated their websites to ensure

that asylum applicants had access to detailed and up-to-date information.

They re-designed already-existing information systems, while others relocated

websites, developed new websites and produced leaflets to make it easier

and faster for applicants to obtain information.

In Finland, the Finnish Immigration Service created a new homepage where

applicants have quick access to key information on the asylum procedure and trending

topics.⁷⁵⁹ In the Netherlands, the style and layout of the IND website underwent a complete

transformation to improve the user experience.⁷⁶⁰ Similarly, in Iceland, the Directorate of

Immigration moved its website to the public service portal in order to improve accessibility,

and the content of the site was reviewed and partially rewritten to enhance services for

website visitors. A new online chat feature was also developed to address inquiries about the

directorate’s services.⁷⁶¹

In France, OFPRA launched a new website to improve access to information and provide

translations of the applicant area for asylum seekers in languages frequently spoken by

applicants and beneficiaries of international protection. A new section is dedicated to asylum

professionals who work with applicants for international protection. The website is currently

available in English and French.⁷⁶²

In Latvia, the Office of Citizenship and Migration Affairs developed new leaflets that explain

requesting asylum and receiving protection,⁷⁶³ what happens after applying for asylum,

including the outcome of the personal interview,⁷⁶⁴ and details on accommodation, detention

and family reunification.⁷⁶⁵

Additionally, steps were taken to ensure applicants were informed of the status of their

application. This is important for applicants with pending cases, since a lack of clarity may

result in absconding and secondary movements, not to mention having an emotional and

mental impact on the applicant. For applicants waiting on a decision on international

202

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

protection, the Office for Foreigners in Poland set up an SMS notification system.⁷⁶⁶ At five

stages in the procedure, information was provided on the following topics: registration of the

application and case number, the summons to the hearing along with the date and time of the

scheduled hearing, completion of the collection of evidence and the opportunity to comment

on the case and review of the case files before issuing a decision, issuing a decision in the

case, and transferring the case files to the Council for Refugees, in the event of an appeal.⁷⁶⁷

In-person and offline services

Projects in 2022 also focused on services and information provision through

offline environments and live platforms, which foster human interaction and

immediate replies to queries. For example, the Swedish Migration Agency

expanded its services in 11 new locations, where employees informed

applicants about procedures and regulations, and supported them in

navigating the agency’s website.⁷⁶⁸

To enhance the quality of information supplied and make migration services more convenient,

the Panevėžys branch of the Migration Department in Lithuania provided services to clients in

new facilities.⁷⁶⁹ The Office for Foreigners in Poland further organised information sessions on

Saturdays, including details on the procedure, how to view case files, deliver letters and

summons, and submit statements.⁷⁷⁰

Several countries set up hotlines to provide information on the asylum procedure in a practical

manner. The Office for Foreigners in Poland established a new hotline number for

applicants,⁷⁷¹ the Office of Citizenship and Migration Affairs in Latvia piloted a hotline,⁷⁷² and

the Spanish National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) established an on-call service, which is

accessible around the clock, to provide information and support on asylum matters.⁷⁷³

National authorities have an obligation to provide information to potential applicants in

detention facilities, at border crossing points and in reception facilities. During monitoring

visits by the European Network of NHRIs, the Polish NHRI was observed disseminating

multilingual pamphlets on international protection procedures at border guard stations,

guarded centres and during field interventions.⁷⁷⁴

The Dutch Research and Documentation Centre published a report on information provision

by COA at reception centres. Although initial information provided to applicants upon their

arrival at the facility received positive feedback, applicants found that the current automated

method does not foster interaction and they preferred group meetings to share information.

The report also revealed that it was difficult to understand the information by applicants who

do not speak English or have a low level of education.⁷⁷⁵ It recommended to tailor information

for certain groups, such as those who are illiterate. It also suggested to use digital tools, such

as social media channels and WhatsApp groups, to disseminate information, while staff

members should build rapport and trust with applicants.⁷⁷⁶

Assisted voluntary returns

Some national authorities launched new or continued with initiatives to inform

third-country nationals about the possibility of support for assisted voluntary

returns to the home country. In Austria and Cyprus, the campaigns were

targeted at Indian nationals through the homepages of the authorities.⁷⁷⁷

203

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

Continuing from 2021, the Norwegian UDI provided grants to organisations to inform

individuals without a legal residence about assisted returns. The funding was available to non-

profit, voluntary organisations, individuals and businesses, and targeted people who were not

residing in reception centres.⁷⁷⁸

In Malta, the Voluntary Return Unit offered a free counselling session to third-country nationals

who may benefit from voluntary return assistance.⁷⁷⁹ In Poland, a newly-established hotline

provided information on assisted voluntary returns.⁷⁸⁰

4.9.1.2. New initiatives by civil society organisations

Civil society organisations continued to assist asylum applicants by

undertaking initiatives to inform them about the asylum procedure. For

example, Info Migrants created a list of the most important terms,

abbreviations and acronyms that asylum seekers and refugees should know

when applying for international protection in France, Greece and Italy.⁷⁸¹ The

Refugee.Info team in Greece⁷⁸² and Italy⁷⁸³ launched new websites that offer

crucial information on the asylum process.

The Swedish Network of Refugees Support (FARR) updated its handbook, Good Advice, and

translated the document into Arabic, Farsi and Russian. The publication details how to apply

for asylum in Sweden and what to expect after a decision, focusing on what applicants can do

to contribute to a fair process. Special sections cover how asylum is assessed for women,

children, LGBTIQ applicants, religious converts and people who have been subjected to

torture.⁷⁸⁴

4.9.1.3. Concerns raised on providing access to information

Despite progress, there were concerns raised about the quality and

accessibility of information on the asylum procedure, as has been the case in

previous years. NHRIs identified a trend of insufficient or poor-quality

information being provided to migrants by state authorities on their rights to

request international protection and to seek a remedy when rights have been

breached.⁷⁸⁵

In Cyprus, an overall concern was raised about the lack of information provided, both in terms

of the number of NGO providers, their availability and the information material available.⁷⁸⁶ In

Greece, it was underlined that access to information was problematic, bearing in mind the

need to provide information on an expanded set of obligations and penalties that can be

imposed on applicants in line with national law.⁷⁸⁷

In monitoring access to the asylum procedure, the Lithuanian Red Cross identified several

instances when applicants had not been given sufficient information about the applicable

asylum procedure, including information on their legal situation, the status of their application

and the possibility of being able to actively participate in the asylum procedure.⁷⁸⁸

Often the mode of providing information was not considered to be conducive to applicants to

fully understand the framework and their own particular circumstances. In the Italian hotspot of

Lampedusa, based on their visit, the ASGI raised an issue with information being provided

through a general paper brochure with no specific instructions and through monitors

204

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

displayed in the area where photo identifications are completed. The ASGI considered both of

these tools to be inadequate given the circumstances in which they were used.⁷⁸⁹

Moreover, several NHRIs drew attention to the inability of some national authorities to

overcome linguistic and cultural barriers that prevent asylum seekers from understanding their

rights and the complaint mechanisms that are available. The concerns raised included

insufficient or non-existent translation of crucial information on migrants’ rights, the availability

of interpreters and a lack of a commitment to ensure that the information is presented in a way

that the person can understand.⁷⁹⁰

In keeping with the above, the Justice of Peace of Syracuse highlighted the failure of Italian

authorities to translate the decree of rejection (entry ban/refoulement) into a language known

by the applicant, as neither the applicant’s language nor potential illiteracy had been

determined. The Italian authorities also did not provide any proof of having fulfilled the

obligation of informing the individual of their right to apply for asylum.

The High Court in Ireland found in another case that an applicant had not been provided with

adequate information on the family reunification procedure in a language that they

understood, which violated Article 22 of the recast QD.

4.9.2. Information for specific nationalities

Afghans

More than a year after the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, many EU+ countries retained

information for Afghans on their websites, while the frequency of updates to these pages

slowed down. In most cases, the content was relocated from the homepage to subpages of

the authorities’ website. Information for Afghan applicants remained accessible on national

authorities’ websites in Denmark,⁷⁹¹ Finland,⁷⁹² Germany⁷⁹³, the Netherlands,⁷⁹⁴ Norway,⁷⁹⁵

Poland,⁷⁹⁶ Sweden⁷⁹⁷ and Switzerland.⁷⁹⁸

Ukrainians

By the end of 2022, all EU+ countries had developed websites or webpages to provide

information to displaced persons from Ukraine (see the EUAA’s Who is Who: Temporary

Protection to view the information tools developed by each country). These pages were

regularly updated to provide the most up-to-date and accurate information in a rapidly-

changing environment.

Since the activation of the Temporary Protection Directive on 4 March 2022, great efforts

were made by EU+ countries and civil society organisations to inform this target population

about their rights and the procedural steps to take to receive temporary protection. (Read

more about access to information on temporary protection in the EUAA’s comprehensive

report, Providing Temporary Protection to Displaced Persons from Ukraine: A Year in Review.)

As the report notes, all 30 EU+ countries created dedicated tools and websites to provide

information on access to relevant procedures and rights for displaced persons from Ukraine.

In addition, several EU+ countries provided channels for personalised information through the

creation of dedicated telephone lines and e-mail addresses. EU institutions and agencies,

NGOs and international organisations, such as UNHCR and the IOM, also developed

information material in various countries. Efforts also focused on producing more information

205

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

material in Ukrainian and Russian. The European Commission launched information webpages

and tools to centralise information resources, and several EU agencies made additional

resources available in relation to their mandate.

Russians

Following President Putin’s announcement of a partial military mobilisation on 21 September

2022, Finland started to see an increase in the number of asylum applications lodged by

Russian nationals.⁷⁹⁹ Additionally, many Russian nationals started contacting the Norwegian

UDI with questions about claiming asylum in Norway.⁸⁰⁰ In response, the Finnish Immigration

Service⁸⁰¹ and the Norwegian UDI⁸⁰² updated their websites with specific information for

Russian nationals about claiming asylum. The webpages contained Frequently Asked

Questions and were accessible in Russian.

4.9.3. Information on everyday life, rights and

obligations

4.9.3.1. Information provided by national authorities

Both applicants and beneficiaries of international protection were provided

with information about daily life in the host country in several EU+ countries.

This included information about their rights, obligations and services that are

available to them.

In Luxemburg, the Ministry of Family, Integration and the Greater Region

launched an online platform, InfoLux, that provides information for newly-arrived migrants on

various aspects of life in Luxemburg to encourage integration.⁸⁰³

In France, OFPRA created new tools in 2022 to support protected persons. It developed a

welcome booklet for recognised refugees with information on their legal, economic and social

rights, as well as useful addresses where to attain those rights.⁸⁰⁴

In Czechia, the Refugee Facilities Administration of the Ministry of the Interior launched a

monthly newsletter for each of the Centres for Support of Integration of Foreigners (CPIC) to

share information on developments in integration and migration, including verified sources of

information and news from each region.⁸⁰⁵

The Finnish Institute for Health and Wellbeing created a multilingual video series entitled

“Mental Health for Immigrants”, which consisted of 23 videos on mental health aimed at

people who come to Finland as refugees.⁸⁰⁶

In Portugal, the Directorate-General for Health published five information leaflets to help

migrants better understand their health-related rights and how to access health care in

Portugal. The leaflets, which are available in ten languages, centre on various topics including

family planning, vaccinations, access to health care, mental health, pregnancy and useful

contacts.⁸⁰⁷

206

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

As part of a campaign to create and disseminate information tailored to the needs of migrants

and applicants of international protection, the Public Security Police and the High

Commissioner for Migration in Portugal disseminated leaflets in eight languages containing

advice on home security, street safety and violence.⁸⁰⁸

4.9.3.2. Information provided in reception centres

National authorities launched initiatives to inform applicants in reception

centres about everyday life and social services available. In Poland, the Office

for Foreigners provided orientation courses in centres for foreigners. The

courses were conducted in Polish, English and Russian and covered topics

such as social assistance, medical care, access to the labour market,

regulations, compulsory education, learning Polish and Polish culture and

history.⁸⁰⁹

The State Agency for Refugees in Bulgaria, in partnership with UNICEF, created a video that

introduces social services to unaccompanied minor applicants in reception centres. The

content was translated into Arabic, Bulgarian, Dari, English and Pashto.⁸¹⁰ The videos aim to

promote specialised childcare facilities (ЦНСТ) which are licensed family-type children's

centres, where children should be accommodated after recognition but can be

accommodated during the asylum procedure. However, the majority of the children hesitate to

leave the familiar conditions of the reception centres. Therefore, the videos showcase other

children who have already been accommodated in the specialised facilities and share their

positive experience, thus assisting to mitigate the existing prejudice among the children in

reception centres and their anxiety of the unknown.

In the Netherlands, COA, in collaboration with the National Swimming Safety Board, launched

a new film “Nederland Waterland” to inform adult residents in reception centres about the

dangers of being in and near open water.⁸¹¹

4.9.3.3. Information provided by organisations and public authorities

Various organisations and public authorities continued to play an important

role in providing information on employment, education, health care, housing

and other aspects of everyday life. For example, Jobsplus and UNHCR Malta

collaborated to create an informational video series for refugees and asylum

seekers looking for employment in Malta. The videos have an English

voiceover with subtitles in Arabic, Bengali, French, Somali and Tigrinya.⁸¹²

Hal Far Outreach and RIME Malta, in close cooperation with asylum seekers living in Malta,

produced an informational leaflet on a variety of topics, including basic information about

Malta, health services, education, housing opportunities, banking, transportation, employment,

government offices and local NGOs.⁸¹³

Are You Syrious and BIRD published a handbook explaining access to health care for

beneficiates of international protection in Croatia.⁸¹⁴ The Refugee.Info team in Greece and Italy

supplied up-to-date information on daily living, including housing, health care, employment,

education, social benefits and numerous other topics.⁸¹⁵

With regard to urban asylum seekers and refugees living in the Sofia region of Bulgaria,

UNHCR funded an Information Centre, run by the Red Cross, along with an Information Bureau

207

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

for Third-Country Nationals, co-funded by the Sofia municipality, both located in Sofia.

In 2022, altogether 992 asylum seekers and beneficiaries of international protection

(438 individuals at the Information Centre and 554 at the Information Bureau) were provided

1,494 consultations and different types of information (654 consultations at the Information

Centre and 842 consultations at the Information Bureau).

UNHCR Greece launched a new Facebook information page with advice and information on

everyday living in Greece, including services which are accessible to refugees and asylum

seekers, children's programmes and employment opportunities. Information is posted in

Arabic, English and Farsi, with plans to add other languages in the future.⁸¹⁶ The organisation

also provided support in the development of information material in multiple languages to be

displayed in the quarantine areas of the CCACs and RICs on the islands and Evros, donated

audio-visual equipment, and continued to be engaged in the information provision of new

arrivals in CCACs and RICs.

RefugeeHelp launched a website with information on a range of topics for beneficiaries of

international protection in the Netherlands. The website was initially designed to provide

information to Ukrainian refugees, but it has since been updated for all refugees and asylum

seekers. The website is currently available in English, Dutch, Russian and Ukrainian but will

soon be available in Arabic, Dari, Farsi, French, Somali, Tigrinya and Turkish.⁸¹⁷

The Foundation for Access to Rights, in partnership with the International Rescue Committee,

announced it will be part of an international network for accessible information for refugees in

Bulgaria. The aim will be to provide accurate information to asylum seekers and other

migrants on their rights and benefits, including legal aid, social assistance, health and

psychological support, education and long-term accommodation options.⁸¹⁸ In addition, the

Bulgarian Helsinki Committee continued to provide information through audio material and

through the asylum.bg platform, funded by UNHCR.

Moreover, several NGOs developed tools and resources for people working with refugees

and refugee-led organisations. To showcase a few examples, Save the Children in Denmark

launched a new website providing information and material to volunteers and professionals

who welcome refuge children. Experts from the organisation offered their knowledge and

experiences through one-day training sessions, educational resources and guidance.⁸¹⁹

The Cyprus Refugee Council, alongside aditus foundation in Malta, developed a training kit to

support refugee-led organisations in their efforts to enhance the human rights of refugees.

The toolkit aims to strengthen refugee inclusion by empowering refugees who want to play an

active role in their communities and at the EU level.⁸²⁰

208

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

In 2022, some EU+ countries continued efforts to improve access to and the quality of legal

assistance in all stages of the asylum procedure. They launched new initiatives and projects,

for example contracting specialised lawyers working in asylum matters and offering additional

support to applicants with special needs. Professional development and new tools were made

available for legal practitioners, with the overall aim of improving the quality of services.

Significant efforts were also noted in the provision of legal aid services throughout the asylum

procedure through digitalisation and interconnectivity between determining authority portals

and court platforms.

However, as reported in previous years,⁸²² the implementation of the recast APD remained an

issue of concern at the border, in detention facilities and in the appeals procedure due to

insufficient information and access to legal assistance and representation. In some cases, the

short time limits in the border procedure, in special procedures or the Dublin procedure

resulted in limited, poor quality or non-existent legal assistance.

Civil society and international organisations scrutinised legislative proposals and amendments

made in 2022 which could hamper access to legal aid at the border. For example, UNHCR

reiterated the need to ensure procedural safeguards, including access to free legal assistance

during a border procedure and while in detention.⁸²³

Box 4. Assistance to displaced persons from Ukraine

Once the Temporary Protection Directive was activated to provide protection to

displaced persons from Ukraine, the Council of Europe opened migration e-desks to

assist lawyers and legal professionals who were managing substantial caseloads.

The virtual Asylum/Migration HELP e-Desks are managed by tutors and legal experts

to support lawyers in countries neighbouring Ukraine, namely : Romania, Slovakia,

Hungary, Poland (with EU support) and Moldova. In addition to these portals, National

HELP eDesks were set up in Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czechia, France, Germany,

Greece and Spain, while several others are in preparation (for example in Latvia,

Lithuania and Slovenia).

Similarly, the Legal Aid Coordination Centre in Poland mobilised efforts to provide

continuous legal assistance and information to displaced Ukrainians, either in person

or electronically (through its website and helpline). The centre is supported and

funded by the Norwegian Refugee Council since June 2022 and works with 14

Ukrainian lawyers.

210

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

4.10.1. Legal information and access to legal aid as

prerequisites for an effective asylum procedure

In 2022, EU+ countries and international and civil society organisations

mobilised resources to provide immediate support to displaced persons from

Ukraine, including legal information and assistance through new initiatives,

the active involvement of national bar associations and extended means of

communication.⁸²⁴

International organisations focused on providing recommendations and guidance on asylum

applicants’ effective access to information and legal counselling, emphasising the importance

of legal and procedural information. While civil society organisations pointed to areas of

concern in the provision of legal aid, for example during special procedures, courts ruled on

the formal requirements of free legal aid and safeguards for applicants with special needs.

The Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE) published “Recommendations on a

framework on legal aid in the field of migration and international protection”, which was based

on a survey that assessed the situation in different Member States.⁸²⁵ It found that the

increase in migrants in Europe, including asylum applicants and refugees, resulted in a higher

number of applications for legal aid. While the CCBE stated that all EU Member States provide

legal aid at least for some types of procedures and appeals, it found that practices varied

greatly across countries. The recommendations included adapting legal frameworks for easy

access and clear eligibility criteria; establishing a specialised legal aid system for asylum

applicants; and ensuring legal aid in specific procedures.⁸²⁶ UNHCR has underlined that these

practices enhance the quality and efficiency of the registration procedure.⁸²⁷The CCBE also

highlighted that legal information should be provided in a child-friendly manner and by

electronic means for proper dissemination.

In Germany, with the entry into force of the Act on the Acceleration of Asylum Court

Proceedings and the Asylum Procedure on 1 January 2023, state-run counselling will be

replaced by a new system, combining the provision of information by BAMF and independent

counselling, financed by the federal government but carried out by welfare associations or

other civil society organisations. Throughout 2022, counselling for asylum seekers was done

by BAMF, which will continue until the new system is established. Civil society organisations

noted that the provisions on counselling have been reformed and it now encompasses advice

on legal remedies against asylum decisions, but falls short of covering legal representation at

first or second instances.⁸²⁸

Following the reform of the Swiss asylum system in 2019, UNHCR observed that the

registration and processing of applications is approached holistically, including by providing

applicants with information and legal assistance in federal reception centres.⁸²⁹ The

coordination among all actors involved in the procedure and the active involvement of legal

aid providers increased trust in and the efficiency of the first instance procedure.⁸³⁰ In 2022,

SEM decided that free legal advice should also apply to persons who file an asylum

application from detention, thus changing its long-term practice.⁸³¹

However, in times of migratory pressure, the system may not be as efficient and additional

efforts would be needed. This was noted in the second half of 2022 when the number of new

asylum applications increased sharply. The Swiss Refugee Council reported challenges in

communication between legal representatives and applicants as a result of delays in the

211

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

asylum procedure.⁸³² Due to insufficient capacity in federal reception centres, where

applicants usually receive free legal aid, they were channelled earlier and temporarily to

accommodation in the cantons where certain services are generally not available.⁸³³ During

this time, SEM reported to have kept a constant dialogue with legal aid providers, allowing for

smooth communication between stakeholders and asylum applicants.

Faced with a high number of applicants in need of legal aid, organisations engaged through

online and remote means. In its publication, UNHCR highlighted that the Danish Refugee

Council provided timely access to information and legal counselling through a dedicated

platform and application.⁸³⁴ Also the Swedish Refugee Centre noted that the continuation of

remote counselling after the lifting of COVID-19-related restrictions allowed the organisation to

reach a wider group of asylum seekers.⁸³⁵

Several judgments were issued in the course of 2022, looking into various aspects of effective

access to legal aid and the scope of this right. In an appeal on points of law, the Spanish

Supreme Tribunal clarified that when legal aid is not mandatory in the procedure and the

applicant was duly informed of his rights at an early stage, failure to mark a box in the

information form is equivalent to waiving this right.

The Swedish Migration Court of Appeal ruled that, while the SMA may refuse to grant an

applicant the right to public assistance, it cannot appeal against an administrative court

decision which allows state-funded legal assistance on the basis of the Aliens Act.

In February 2022, the Regional Court of Zwolle in the Netherlands agreed with an asylum

seeker that, since their explicit request for legal assistance at the start of the application

procedure was not addressed, the Secretary of State had violated the principle of due care. In

its recommendations to the Swedish and Spanish Presidencies of the Council of the EU,

UNHCR recommended to facilitate access to information and legal support in the family

reunification procedure.⁸³⁶

In the case Darboe and Camara v Italy, the ECtHR ruled on procedural safeguards for

unaccompanied minors who were placed in adult reception centres. The court found

violations of Articles 3, 8 and 13 by the national authorities when failing to provide information

on the asylum procedure, appoint a legal guardian and ensure access to a lawyer. As a result,

the applicant was erroneously considered to be an adult and his right to procedural

safeguards in the age assessment procedure was not ensured in Italy.

In a report published on access to the asylum procedure and the application of the safe third

country concept, NOAS in Norway explained that legal aid in the inadmissibility procedure

remains purely theoretical.⁸³⁷ It stated that asylum seekers were not informed of these rights,

asylum cases were not considered to be a priority for legal aid under Article 11 of the Legal Aid

Act, and the decision-making process on applications for legal aid could take 6-8 weeks.

Against this background, an applicant subject to the inadmissibility procedure would be

deported by the time they were eligible for free legal aid. National authorities were reportedly

reluctant to proposals to abolish these impediments because in their view free legal aid would

undermine the effectiveness of the inadmissibility procedure.

With the increased number of asylum applications from third-country nationals who already

hold a residence permit on other grounds in Norway, the Ministry of Justice and Public

Security issued guidelines for the UDI on the weight to be given to this situation in the overall

212

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

assessment of the claim. It also clarified that free legal aid in such cases is not freely granted

but conditioned by a needs test.⁸³⁸

In Slovenia, the Public Advocate for the Principle of Equality assessed a provision in

Article 9(10) of the International Protection Act on refugee counsellors to be discriminatory.

The law allows a refugee counsellor to be dismissed if they do not disclose confidential

information about the applicant, which could affect the decision on the asylum claim, to the

determining authority. The advocate underlined that the provision creates a disadvantage for

asylum applicants who cannot afford the services of a private lawyer and apply for free legal

aid. Moreover, the advocate stressed that such provision infringes the right to an effective

remedy as enshrined in Article 47 of the EU Charter and the Slovenian Constitution.⁸³⁹ The

Ministry of the Interior explained that the recommendation was taken into consideration and

will be reflected in the next amendment of the International Protection Act.

4.10.2. The right of the representative to access files

and the premises

According to Article 23 of the recast APD, legal representatives, lawyers and

legal counsellors who assist or represent an applicant must have access to

the information in the file based on which a decision was or will be taken.

Some Member States are implementing digital solutions to allow for quick

access and to make the process more efficient. The CJEU provided

clarification on access to electronic files and the disclosure of

confidential/classified information.

Legal representatives and legal advisers also have the right to access closed facilities,

detention and transit zones to consult and communicate with an applicant. However, in

practice, they continued to face difficulties in 2022 in accessing premises due to additional

requirements which were imposed by national authorities.

The Swedish SMA developed an e-portal with a secure website to allow legal representatives

to submit relevant evidence and documents. They can also schedule appointments and online

meetings with case officers, in addition to viewing the status of the application.⁸⁴⁰

In December 2022, the CJEU ruled in BU, C-564/21, on electronic access to the case file and

the final administrative decision. The court stated that Articles 23(1), 46(1) and 46(3) of the

recast APD must be interpreted as allowing the administrative authority to provide access to

the electronic file in a format of a series of PDF files, displayed separately and without page

numbering, which is accessible with free software.

In September 2022, the CJEU ruledin GM, C-159/21, on the requirements to access classified

information by an applicant and the legal representative and on the decision to withdraw

international protection based on a non-reasoned opinion of a national security body about

the applicant being a danger to national security (see Section 2.6.). The CJEU stated that it is

contrary to EU law for national legislation not to allow an applicant or the legal representative

to access the substance of classified information, after obtaining a specific authorisation for

access, and to prohibit them to use this information in the defence before administrative or

judicial bodies deciding on international protection.

213

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

By referring to the CJEU and ECtHR jurisprudence, ECRE and the Hungarian Helsinki

Committee mentioned that access to classified documents by legal representatives after

undergoing a security clearance must be complemented by effective communication between

the applicant and the legal representative.⁸⁴¹ The right to a fair trial encompasses the right to

an effective remedy which can be exercised only when the person, alone or with the support

of a legal representative, can argue a case and present factual evidence.

The Dutch Court of the Hague annulled a negative decision for neglecting to inform the

applicant’s representative that a registration interview had been conducted and to allow the

lawyer to access the script of the interview to properly prepare the applicant for the second

interview.

Greek NGOs outlined that their lawyers encountered difficulties in accessing premises

managed by the Ministry of Migration and Asylum because they were asked for proof of

authorisation from the applicants and the registration of NGO staff at the ministry.

Consequently, the Greek Bar Association issued legal opinions shared with the Ministry of

Migration and Asylum to clarify a lawyer’s role and responsibilities, and their registration with

the Greek Bar Association as a sufficient prerequisite even if they work for a civil society

organisation.⁸⁴²

According to DRC Greece, lawyers and legal representatives had difficulties in accessing

reception and detention facilities in 2022 because of the new access control system

(YPERION), which is applicable to all persons entering and working in reception facilities in

Greece. The NGO mentioned that the rules and procedures on access to lawyers were not

made public, and consequently, they were not applied in a uniform manner across the

territory.⁸⁴³ Similarly, NGOs noted that in practice in a significant number of cases taken over

by lawyers on the mainland, the latter had no communication with the rejected applicants

before drafting the appeals and had to rely solely on the material already included in the file.

The appellants had no way of communicating to their appointed lawyer any new elements

related to their case or new significant documents. Moreover, some asylum applicants

reported communication issues with their state-registered lawyers and the short duration of

the preparation meeting. This happened despite the decision of the Central Asylum Service

on the provision of legal assistance through video-conferencing to the Regional Asylum

Services of Leros, Samos, Chios and Lesvos.

Similar difficulties were mentioned by the Lithuanian Red Cross about the difficult working

conditions in detention premises, a shortage of interpretation for rare languages and

insufficient information on access to legal aid for detained asylum applicants.⁸⁴⁴

4.10.3. Legal aid in the appeal procedure

Challenges were reported in the provision of legal aid in the appeals

procedure. One of the concerns raised in 2022 was the overall low number of

people receiving legal aid among all applicants for international protection, for

example in Poland,⁸⁴⁵ Greece and Cyprus. The AIDA report for Greece noted

that this strongly suggested difficulties faced by applicants in accessing and

securing state-funded, free legal aid in appeals procedure, as provided by law.

Asylex in Switzerland specified in its submission to the UN Human Rights Council that rejected

asylum applicants faced difficulties in finding a replacement lawyer within the short timelines

214

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

for an appeal, when the mandate of the initially-appointed legal representative ended and the

case was considered to lack prospects of success before the courts.⁸⁴⁶ The organisation also

extensively described shortcomings in the provision of legal assistance and representation in

the appeals procedure related to differences between regions, with French-speaking regions

having a higher rate of appeals against negative decisions. It also noted that lawyers were

paid by lump sum per case irrespective of the workload and it was at the lawyer’s discretion to

write an appeal for an applicant.

According to Asylex, only 53% of appeals were submitted by state-funded lawyers and

10% were submitted by a different lawyer after the end of the mandate of a state-paid lawyer.

In total, 37% of appeals were without legal representation.

Asylex also reported on a change in practice for rejected Afghan applicants who can now

submit a reconsideration/subsequent request for a provisional admission based on the

changed situation in the country.⁸⁴⁷ Because these situations are not covered under the

mandate of the state-funded legal representation, many Afghan applicants relied on other

legal representatives for information and counselling in order to submit a reconsideration

request.⁸⁴⁸

While the German Federal Administrative Court ruled on timelines for a second appeal, it

clarified that, when several representatives were appointed and they receive notification of

the judgment at different times, this did not justify an extension or restoration of the appeal

deadline because service to one representative was sufficient.

The Border Violence Monitoring Network reported that information on legal assistance in an

appeal procedure was not sufficiently provided to rejected asylum applicants in Greece, thus

their access to a judicial review was hampered due to a lack of knowledge and resources.

Based on statistics provided by the Ministry of Migration and Asylum for 2022, the same NGO

noted that only 3,872 applicants out of 8,302 negative cases applied for free legal assistance

through the registry of lawyers within the Asylum Service.⁸⁴⁹ According to the Network for

Children, some requests for legal aid for an appeal were rejected without justification.⁸⁵⁰

DRC Greece noted that a low rate of judicial reviews was submitted before the Administrative

Courts to contest a negative decision issued by the Appeals Committees. This was because

free legal aid is not provided in second or higher appeals. This issue was raised in a Joint Civil

Society Submission to the European Commission on the 2023 Rule of Law Report, along with

the difficulty for NGOs to offer legal assistance due to limited resources.⁸⁵¹

In Lithuania, while reporting on the poor quality of services from state-funded legal

representatives in the appeals procedure, the Lithuanian Red Cross gave the example of

insufficient information being provided to asylum applicants and a lack of contact between

applicants and lawyers prior to an appeal submission.⁸⁵² In addition, the NGO mentioned an

alleged interference of national authorities in the selection process of the legal aid provider

which led to a new procurement procedure for legal aid services.⁸⁵³

The Supreme Court of Cassation in Italy ruled on the inadmissibility of a cassation appeal due

to the power of attorney’s lack of certification. Based on Decision No 13/2022 of the

Constitutional Court which found that the legislative provision was compliant with the

Constitution and EU law,⁸⁵⁴ the Court of Cassation confirmed the inadmissibility decision

because the requirement for certification was compatible with CEAS. It reiterated that

215

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

according to the recast APD Member States must provide at least one level of appeal for an

ex nunc examination in order to ensure the right to an effective remedy.

4.10.4. New projects in the provision of legal aid

Various new initiatives by Member States contributed to building capacity for

the provision of legal aid and the development of specialised legal aid

services for international protection applicants. At the same time, civil society

organisations contested some changes in the organisation of legal aid

services and their funding. For example, when the AMIF-funded project on the

provision of legal counselling in the asylum procedure ended in Czechia, the

Ministry of the Interior launched a public tender for the provision of legal assistance in

March 2022, inviting law firms and attorney offices to apply.⁸⁵⁵ OPU raised concern about this

new approach, especially that the awarded lawyers were not specialised in asylum matters,

risking to undermine the quality of services.⁸⁵⁶ The NGO mentioned that, although the Ministry

of the Interior intends to reopen the call for the provision of legal aid to NGOs, the lack of

funding in 2022 resulted in a shortage of experienced staff.

In Slovenia, the Legal-Informational Centre for NGOS (PIC) contested the way the new AMIF

call was organised. The call invited individual refugee counsels to apply, and NGOs were not

able to participate. The call was not public but was instead sent to a limited number of refugee

counsellors who were selected by the Ministry of the Interior; six were selected to provide aid

between April-November 2022. Under the scope of the call, vulnerable and detained asylum

seekers would be provided with free legal aid and representation to lodge an application,

while others could be provided with the services during the personal interview if they asked

for representation. PIC also raised concern with the low share of applicants provided with free

legal aid and representation under the scheme.⁸⁵⁷

The Legal Aid Board in Ireland established a specialised sub-panel of lawyers who will provide

legal aid in the international protection procedure as of 3 January 2023.⁸⁵⁸ Legal aid is

provided to those who have been granted it by the board in connection with their application

for international protection. The sub-panel is designed to be operational initially for 1 year with

the possibility of an extension, aiming to facilitate the organisation of services. Applicants will

continue to apply for legal aid in one of the three designated law centres (Smithfield in Dublin,

Seville House in Galway and Popes Quay in Cork), which are authorised to check eligibility

criteria and designate a lawyer from the sub-panel.⁸⁵⁹ This is with the aim to alleviate current

concerns raised by the Irish Refugee Council, which noted the general lack of capacity,

leading to applicants being told to complete the questionnaire by themselves and many

applicants waiting over 6 weeks to be assigned a representative by the Legal Aid Board.⁸⁶⁰

In Malta, aditus foundation welcomed the strengthened cooperation with the Migrant’s Advice

Unit in the Agency for the Welfare of Asylum Seekers (AWAS), which is staffed with welfare

officers who provide information on employment, housing, education, health and assisting

with integration into the community. Since June 2022, an informal referral system was put in

place for any beneficiaries of services residing in reception centres or in the community,

where MAU can call or send an email to aditus lawyers to inquire about a more complex issue

and refer the person appropriately.⁸⁶¹

Convive Fondation Cepaim informed that bar associations in Spain were piloting their own

International Protection Legal Assistance Offices since 2022, in cooperation with UNHCR.⁸⁶²

216

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

The aim is to increase the knowledge and skills of legal practitioners providing assistance in

the asylum procedure.

In Croatia, the Ministry of the Interior signed a new contract with the Croatian Law Centre on

for the implementation of an AMIF-funded project, “Legal advice in the process of granting

international protection”.⁸⁶³ Information material on legal assistance in the international

protection procedure was prepared in various languages and distributed to asylum applicants,

including relevant versions for unaccompanied minors.⁸⁶⁴

In 2022, the Foundation for Access to Rights in Bulgaria continued to build its capacity to

provide effective legal assistance through a new cross-border project on legal assistance for

the family reunification procedure and the integration of beneficiaries of international

protection.⁸⁶⁵ The project continued existing initiatives on legal aid provision at every step of

the asylum procedure.⁸⁶⁶ In total, 80 applicants benefitted from legal aid through an AMIF-

funded project which targeted third-country nationals with special needs.⁸⁶⁷ The project

ended in October 2022.

In addition, the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee continued its legal aid project funded by UNHCR

and offered advice to 2,383 applicants throughout 2022. The efforts were undertaken in the

absence of state-provided legal aid for applicants in Bulgaria, apart from legal aid provided to

asylum-seeking and refugee children.⁸⁶⁸

IOM Bulgaria implemented a project “Providing legal advice and interpretation for third-

country nationals seeking protection” in 2022, targeting mainly vulnerable applicants. In total,

about 400 third-country nationals seeking asylum benefitted from legal assistance at all

stages of the procedure.

In Germany, a legislative proposal was adopted to include asylum procedure counselling

independent from authorities that also allows special legal aid for the LGBTIQ community and

applicants with special needs (it is part of the funding programme for independent

counselling).

In Slovenia, the pilot project for the provision of free legal assistance to vulnerable asylum

applicants ended in October 2022. Since then, with UNHCR funding, the civil society

organisation PIC has been providing free legal assistance to asylum applicants.

4.10.5. Quality assurance by investing in the work of

lawyers

The professional qualification of lawyers and legal practitioners in the area of

migration and asylum is key to providing services of high quality. In 2022,

developments were noticed in the area of training, organised either by

national authorities or civil society organisations.

In Bulgaria, training for lawyers⁸⁶⁹ focused primarily on applicants with special

needs and unaccompanied minors,⁸⁷⁰ temporary protection and trafficking in human beings.⁸⁷¹

In Romania, similar training activities tackled the application of the international protection

procedure or temporary protection, evidence assessment, obstacles in communicating with

applicants and particularities of country-of-origin information.⁸⁷²

217

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

The European Network on Statelessness (ENS) published a toolkit for legal practitioners on

strategic litigation on statelessness.⁸⁷³ The toolkit provides extensive overviews of key

legislation and jurisprudence, including within the framework of the asylum procedure.

With regard to the remuneration of lawyers, the CCBE noted that fees should be adapted to

the volume and complexity of each case.⁸⁷⁴ The Finnish Refugee Advice Centre raised

concerns about the availability and adequacy of financial support.⁸⁷⁵ For example, the

organisation mentioned that the demand for legal services for asylum applicants has

increased recently, to a total of 25,000 counselling sessions in 2022. The fees for legal aid

will be insufficient in 2023 and the hourly payment of EUR 100 has not change since 2014.

NOAS in Norway welcomed a recent legislative proposal which envisaged to provide a

uniform definition of a civil society organisation and a single platform to apply for public

funding, thus enabling an equitable distribution of funds.⁸⁷⁶ NOAS stated that a clear overview

of public funds that are available will help to plan legal aid services for asylum cases. The

organisation submitted comments to the justice committee on the state budget proposal

for 2023, underlying the need to extend access to legal assistance in the judicial review of

asylum decisions and to increase remuneration based on the number of hours worked for

each case. A project run by NOAS since 2015 revealed that 63% of cases litigated before

courts were successful.⁸⁷⁷

In Austria, legal advice and legal representation for asylum applicants is provided by a

governmental non-profit organisation, the BBU, which took over this responsibility in

January 2021.⁸⁷⁸ Despite positive evaluation reports for 2021,⁸⁷⁹ four asylum applicants who

received legal aid from the BBU complained⁸⁸⁰ before the Constitutional Court about a lack of

access to extraordinary appeals because the agency allegedly failed to inform them about the

outcome of the proceedings before the Federal Administrative Court or to follow up on their

willingness to submit a second appeal. The Constitutional Court initiated proceedings on the

legal basis for legal advice and legal representation within the BBU and if it was in line with

the Constitution.

In addition, the Constitutional Court raised concerns about the compatibility of the act

governing the functioning of the agency with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights

of the European Union, the rule of law and effective judicial protection. The BBU mentioned

that, while the Constitutional Court was examining the constitutionality of provisions related to

the legal basis of the legal aid office, the agency would continue to provide legal aid services

as it has a legal obligation to do so.⁸⁸¹ The decision of the Constitutional Court is not expected

before June 2023. If the court finds the legal basis unconstitutional, the state has at least

18 months to rectify the situation. The ruling was signalled also by the Ludwig Boltzman

Institute as being awaited in order to clarify whether the current organisation and mandate

were compliant with the right to a fair trial and effective remedy as enshrined in the

Constitution.⁸⁸²

In Poland, the Association for Legal Intervention opened a training school in 2023 for legal

practitioners to acquire relevant skills and knowledge to litigate before national courts and the

ECtHR on cases related to asylum seekers and third-country nationals placed in detention.⁸⁸³

The NGO believes that strategic litigation is a strong tool to change non-compliant legislation

and practices related to detention and procedural safeguards.

218

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

4.10.6. Legal aid provision at the border and in

detention

In 2022, pressure fuelled at the borders during the mass influx of migrants

and alleged pushbacks, with reports of asylum seekers being denied access

to legal information and legal aid and being processed rapidly in border

procedures.⁸⁸⁴ International and European human rights organisations called

for the increased accountability of national authorities and the establishment

of a robust and accessible legal aid system at the borders, while ensuring the

quality of legal aid, proper remuneration and access to border, detention and reception

facilities.⁸⁸⁵

ECRE⁸⁸⁶ and other civil society organisations⁸⁸⁷ commented on the Proposal for a

Regulation⁸⁸⁸ of the European Parliament and of the Council addressing situations of

instrumentalization in the field of migration and asylum. They underlined the risk that

applicants who were subject to the border procedure were not ensured all procedural

safeguards, including access to legal aid. The organisations called for an express mention of

the right to “professional and independent legal assistance and representation” as an

essential safeguard in the asylum procedure.

Based on its recent survey on legal aid in the asylum procedure, the CCBE found that most

EU+ countries did not have permanent offices for legal assistance at the borders. It

recommended to establish such information points not only at the border but also in

metropolitan areas, especially in situations of a massive influx of migrants. The CCBE noted,

however, that private lawyers and civil society organisations had set up some legal

information points at the borders.⁸⁸⁹

The European Network of NHRIs published a report on accountability at the border and

underlined that “the provision of legal assistance and representation must be a central

element of a human rights accountability system at borders”. The network mentioned good

communication between the lawyer and asylum applicant, qualified lawyers and access to

premises as being pre-conditions to ensure that the legal aid system is well-functioning,

accessible and with quality services.⁸⁹⁰

In Greece, civil society organisations reported that detained asylum seekers had limited or no

access to legal information and legal assistance (see Section 4.8).⁸⁹¹ Likewise, CIRE suggested

that the reform of the Aliens Act should include that the principles and safeguards which are

enshrined for criminal detention (the Salduz law in Belgium) be applied to immigration

detention, including the detention of asylum seekers. The proposal was based on extensive

comparative analysis which found significant differences in procedural safeguards for people

detained in criminal proceedings compared to those subject to asylum- and migration-related

detention.⁸⁹²

The NGO ‘I have Rights’ in Greece mentioned that the planned restriction on the use of the

Internet in the CCAC in Samos would make it more difficult for applicants to access legal

aid.⁸⁹³

219

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

4.10.6.1. Legislative amendments and proposals

UNHCR⁸⁹⁴ and the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights⁸⁹⁵

raised concerns about the proposed legislative amendments to Article 9¹⁰of

the Estonian State Border Act.⁸⁹⁶ The amendments restrict access to

procedures in emergency situations, such as a mass influx of migrants, and in

the event of a threat to public order or national security (see Section 4.1).

Together with border restrictions, the absence of an automatic suspensive effect during an

appeal against an immediate return prevents access to effective remedies and legal aid.

UNHCR reiterated that the right to an effective remedy encompasses the right to legal aid as

an essential component. While the measures would be temporary and exceptional, the right to

seek asylum and adherence to the principle of non-refoulement cannot be derogated from.⁸⁹⁷

Amendments to the Finnish Border Guard Act entered into force on 15 July 2022 to reinforce

security at the border and allow the centralisation of applicants for international protection at

one or more border crossing points. According to the Ministry of the Interior, border access

restrictions will be applied during a serious threat to public security, national security or public

health due to a mass influx of migrants (see Section 4.1).

The Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights raised concerns about the

instrumentalisation of migration, the risk of refoulement and the lack of access to the

procedure and an individual assessment of each situation.⁸⁹⁸ While the commissioner urged to

adhere to the ECHR, the Geneva Convention and sufficient safeguards in the legislation, the

Finnish Refugee Advice Centre added that adequate access to legal information and

counselling is a procedural safeguard as well.⁸⁹⁹ The Ministry of the Interior submitted a letter

in reply and reiterated that the legislative amendment aims to strengthen border security and

Finland will continue to fully respect international human rights instruments.⁹⁰⁰

The Ministry of the Interior initiated preparations for legislative amendments of the Aliens Act

to introduce the border procedure in Finland.⁹⁰¹ The objective is to implement a rapid, 4-week

decision-making process for manifestly-unfounded applications and applications that are

considered to be inadmissible when an application for international protection is submitted at

the border, transit zone or immediately after an apprehension in connection with an

unauthorised crossing of the external border. In addition, the Finnish Refugee Advice Centre

requested an explicit provision to be added on the provision of legal aid as a guarantee in the

border procedure.⁹⁰² However, the parliament did not manage to consider the proposal by the

end of the electoral term (29 March 2023) and it was allowed to lapse. The next government

will decide if the changes will be proposed again.

4.10.6.2. Legal aid as a component of the right to an effective remedy

In 2022, national and European courts analysed the right to legal aid at the

border and in detention in a broader context of potential human rights

violations. Several organisations also commented on practices in

EU+ countries.

In submissions on pending cases against Greece⁹⁰³ and Poland,⁹⁰⁴ UNHCR

underlined that, while assessing procedural safeguards for asylum seekers at the border and

in detention, the EctHR should consider interconnected safeguards, such as access to and the

provision of legal aid. Civil society organisations raised similar issues following the legislative

amendments in Poland in 2021⁹⁰⁵ and stressed that insufficient procedural safeguards, a lack

220

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

of legal aid and a lack of a suspensive effect during an appeal against a return decision at the

border may lead to serious human rights violations.⁹⁰⁶ The NGOs specified that, while the

reduction of the no-entry zone near the Polish-Belarussian border from around 3 km to 200 m

from the border, which took place on 1 July 2022, made it easier for lawyers to provide legal

advice, it did not mean that there was full access to legal assistance. This was due to the lack

of opportunities for the legal representative to present their power of attorney in time, the

border guards sometimes questioning the authenticity of the power of attorney and cases of

migrants terminating the power of attorney, acting due to alleged influence of the border

guards.⁹⁰⁷

The Polish Commissioner for Human Rights published a report on the situation of foreigners in

guarded centres and presented recommendations to the national authorities, including the

need to address the issue of access to legal assistance for asylum applicants placed in

detention.⁹⁰⁸

The Polish District Court in Bielsk Podlaski ruled that the detention of returned applicants at

the Polish-Belarusian border was unlawful and found amongst other irregularities that they

were denied contact and communication with their lawyer.⁹⁰⁹

In the case of S.H. v Malta, the EctHR found violations of Article 3 jointly with Article 13 of the

European Convention due to the lack of an adequate assessment of an asylum application

lodged by a Bangladeshi national in Malta, the lack of legal assistance and lack of an effective

remedy. The court found that the applicant as deprived of procedural guarantees during his

detention and assessment of his application in an accelerated procedure. The Maltese

government made a referral to the Grand Chamber and stated that it strongly disagreed with

the conclusions of the court.

In recent submissions before the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe (CoE) on the

execution of judgments against Bulgaria and Croatia, civil society organisations reiterated the

standards on legal assistance for detained asylum seekers and returnees. The main

recommendations included access to the border and detention facilities in order to ensure

access to information, interpretation, legal assistance, including contact with lawyers and civil

society organisations, for a clear understanding of the asylum and return procedure.⁹¹⁰ The

Croatian Ministry of the Interior reiterated the provisions of the law, which foresee that

applicants whose freedom of movement is restricted are informed about the right to legal aid

in a language they understand and they are given a list of lawyers from which the applicant

can choose. The decision is submitted to the competent court to evaluate the legality.

Agreements are in place with the Croatian Red Cross, UNHCR and the IOM, and they regularly

visit the reception centres for foreigners.

On a related point, in Ireland concerns were raised about the lack of transparency on

information and legal assistance provided to persons who were refused access to the

international protection procedure, particularly those at the frontiers of the state who are

refused leave to land.⁹¹¹ In Malta, concerns remained around consistent testimonies by

applicants arriving in 2022 who reported to UNHCR that they were pressured towards a

voluntary departure and told they would be placed in detention, all before they could access a

lawyer or apply for protection.⁹¹²

221

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

Section 4.11.

Interpretation

services

The support of interpreters is important not

Interpreters play a key role throughout

only during the personal interview but also

the asylum procedure to ensure that

in providing information at the first stage of

the exchange of information between

an asylum application and during daily life in

an applicant and the asylum authority

reception. While the recast APD sets out the

is accurate and understood by both

legislative provisions for interpretation, the

parties. They are pivotal in enabling

recast RCD calls for information on

applicants to tell their story in their own

reception conditions to be given in a

words. Thus, skilled interpreters can

language that the applicant understands or

reflect the nuances of a dialect and

is reasonably supposed to understand. It

address the specific needs of

does not, however, mention interpretation

applicants with vulnerabilities.

for other purposes.

Interpretation helps to reduce

misunderstandings and cultural biases

Some Member States have well-developed

and promotes mutual understanding

interpretation services with qualified and

and respect.

experienced interpreters, while others may

have limited resources or capacity to

provide these services. This can lead to

disparities in the quality of interpretation

services, which can have a significant impact

on the fairness of the asylum process and

the result of the final decision. Furthermore,

there may be issues related to the integrity

and impartiality of interpreters, which can

impact the accuracy of interpretation.

222

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

In 2022, legislative changes affecting interpretation in the asylum procedure were introduced

by some EU+ countries. Several initiatives to improve interpretation services were put forward,

especially in the context of health care services and preventing the trafficking of human

beings. Civil society organisations continued to raise concerns about interpretation at the

border.

4.11.1. Legislative and policy updates

Countries undertook various actions to facilitate the provision of

interpretation in the asylum procedure.

In terms of legislative changes, the Interpretation Act entered into force in

Norway in January 2022. It follows from the Interpretation Act that when a

public body is obligated to use an interpreter, a qualified interpreter must be

used. The act also stipulates the requirement of professional conduct, including the duty of

confidentiality, of interpreters.⁹¹³ Public bodies must nominate one of the 2,000 qualified

interpreters who can suggest improvements to the system.⁹¹⁴

In Iceland, a reform was put forward on administrative procedures, including asylum, in order

to provide professional interpretation to individuals who do not speak Icelandic.⁹¹⁵

The new government in Sweden plans a reform to limit the right to a publicly-funded

interpreter, in line with the minimum standards set by EU law.

Most countries use external services to secure interpreters and issue tenders. In 2022, OFPRA

in France launched a tender procedure worth up to EUR 42 million for interpretation services,

which expired in early September 2022.⁹¹⁶ A similar tender in Greece resulted in a change of

provider for interpretation at the national level, while due to contractual issues since

September 2022, interpretation services were provided in a limited fashion, which according

to ECRE led to delays in the registration of applications and interviews. As of February 2023,

the contract for interpretation was awarded to METAdrasi.⁹¹⁷

Finland also launched a new tender with no major changes on the requirements. In addition, it

implemented a new reception model for beneficiaries of temporary protection which involves

municipalities in the provision of reception services, including interpretation.

Videoconferencing and other means of remote interpretation are commonly used to ensure

easier access and faster processing of cases. As of 2022, interpreters in Ireland are allowed

to use videoconferencing during the first instance procedure rather than provide

interpretation by telephone. Similarly, a new law on the acceleration of the appeal procedure

and the asylum procedure introduced the possibility for Germany to provide interpretation

through videoconferencing. The measure is intended to be particularly helpful for rare

languages and situations when there is a regional shortage of interpreters. Germany also

increased the pool of available interpreters.

The legislation on delegating interpretation to the Ministry of the Interior’s employees with

C1 or C2 knowledge of a relevant language was criticised by civil society organisations in

Bulgaria due to the lack of impartiality.⁹¹⁸ This came against the general background of

concerns being raised by civil society organisations about interpretation being provided in

English, French and Arabic, and mainly in the reception centres in the capital Sofia.

223

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

Interpreters from other key languages, such as Kurdish (Sorani or Pehlewani), Pashto, Urdu,

Tamil, Ethiopian and Swahili, were scarce and largely unavailable.⁹¹⁹

To address the arrival of displaced persons from Ukraine, several EU+ countries⁹²⁰ needed to

increase the number of Ukrainian^liv and Russian⁹²¹ speaking interpreters and produce more

information material in those languages.

An area which is often unaddressed, interpretation for people with hearing impairments,⁹²²

was tackled in Austria, Bulgaria, Czechia, Hungary, Italy,⁹²³ Poland and Romania. They

established cooperation mechanisms between local communities and international

organisations. Both qualified and unqualified sign language interpreters were deployed to

provide support to displaced persons with hearing impairments in Ukrainian, Russian and

international sign languages during the first phases of reception to convey relevant

information related to the host country⁹²⁴ and to facilitate access to services.⁹²⁵

The efforts made by EU+ countries and institutions triggered some criticism by civil society

organisations, which reported a two-tier system for people fleeing Ukraine and applicants

from other countries. They noted the ad hoc support services⁹²⁶ and initiatives^lv which were

quickly offered to Ukrainians⁹²⁷. However, the unprecedented situation, which further

emphasised the need for translated information during the international protection procedure,

could foster an opportunity for national authorities to harmonise the level of interpretation

services provided to all individuals seeking protection, irrespectively of the country of origin or

habitual residence.

Box 3. EUAA support to countries

As part of the operating plans, the EUAA provides a range of support services to Member

States, including training case officers and interpreters. The Agency provides general

guidance on the effective use of interpretation in the asylum procedure to ensure quality

and impartiality.

The EUAA also provides direct operational support when Member States are experiencing

disproportionate pressure on their asylum or reception systems, for example when the

demand for interpretation exceeds the capacity of existing services. The EUAA has

significantly expanded its presence in EU+ countries following the war in Ukraine. New

operating plans were signed in 2022 with Bulgaria, Netherlands, Czechia and Romania,

and other plans were amended to provide additional support on the implementation of

temporary protection. An average of 525 cultural mediators and interpreters were

deployed in 12 Member States to facilitate communication between national authorities

and applicants for international protection and beneficiaries of temporary protection (see

Table 4.1).

^liv Belgium was in need of Ukrainian speaking interpreters to translate into French, Dutch or English for both

registration interviews at the Immigration Office and asylum interviews at the CGRS. Due to an increased demand

in Luxembourg, the ONA recruited independent interpreters on a temporary contract. Interpreters have been

deployed to labour offices in Czechia and Ireland in order to facilitate communication for applicants.

^lv In Romania, the IOM deployed 24 Ukrainian-English/Romanian speakers to provide interpretation services and to

convey relevant information to Ukrainians and other third-country nationals fleeing the conflict in key locations

throughout the country, including border crossing points, transit areas and reception centres.

224

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

Table 4.1. EUAA assistance with interpretation through operating plans

Interpreters

Country

Step of procedure

Operating Plan

deployed

Operating Plan

Belgium

Reception

2022, agreed by

EUAA and Belgium

Operational Plan

2022 agreed by

Bulgaria

Temporary protection

N/A

the EUAA and

Bulgaria

Registration, information provision,

Operational Plan

procedures at first and second

2022-2024 agreed

Cyprus

instance, reception, vulnerability

by the EUAA and

assessment, relocation

Cyprus

Operational Plan

Temporary protection, registration,

Czechia

2022 agreed by the

information provision

EUAA and Czechia

Registration, information provision,

Operating Plan

procedures at first instance, Dublin

2022-2024 agreed

Greece

236

procedure, relocation, first and

by the EUAA and

second-line reception

Greece

Access to procedure, referral of

vulnerable applicants, second

Operating Plan

instance, voluntary relocations

Italy

2022-2024 agreed

procedures, information provision

by EASO and Italy

for international protection and

temporary protection

Reception (including information

Operating Plan 2022

Lithuania

provision and vulnerability

agreed by EASO and

identification)

Lithuania

Operating Plan

Latvia

First instance and reception

2022, agreed by

EASO and Latvia

Operational Plan

Access to procedure, first instance,

2022-2024 agreed

Malta

reception, identification, and

by the EUAA and

referral of vulnerable applicants

Malta

Operational Plan

Reception of beneficiaries of

The

2022-2023 agreed

temporary protection, reception

Netherlands

by the EUAA and the

and information provision

Netherlands

Operational Plan

Romania

Temporary protection

2023 agreed by the

EUAA and Romania

Operational Plan

2022 agreed by the

Slovenia

Procedures at first instance

EUAA and the

Republic of Slovenia

Operational Plan

Temporary protection and voluntary

Spain

2022-2023 agreed by

relocation procedure

the EUAA and Spain

225

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

4.11.2. New initiatives

In 2022, EU+ countries implemented proactive measures to address the

needs of victims of human trafficking, including improving the provision of

interpretation. For example, the Ministry of Justice in Iceland published

information material on indicators of human trafficking in three languages

(Icelandic, English and Polish), with the aim of helping to identify potential

victims of human trafficking.⁹²⁸ In Luxembourg, new safeguards were

adopted by courts to provide interpretation to all victims of human trafficking.⁹²⁹

Countries developed more guidance and support material to interpreters throughout 2022.

On International Women’s Day, Belgium announced a series of training sessions for

interpreters on intercultural communication, with a focus on women and victims of human

trafficking.⁹³⁰

BAMF published a revised code of ethics for interpreters in asylum procedures, an updated

booklet with general information and recommendations for interpreters, a new webpage on

interpretation in asylum procedures, and bilingual terminology lists on asylum and SOGI

(sexual orientation and gender identity).⁹³¹

In Finland, a multilingual glossary on housing and social security was developed to provide a

new working tool for interpreters.⁹³²

UNHCR updated its “Handbook for Interpreters in Asylum Proceedings” to reflect changes in

procedures and add specific sections on remote interpretation and interpretation for

groups.⁹³³ OFPRA in France also updated its charter for interpreters issued in 2018.⁹³⁴ A new

call for proposals from the Norwegian Fund was launched in Bulgaria, which aims to improve

specific services directed at asylum applicants, including translation and interpretation.⁹³⁵ The

IOM supported a total of 704 persons accommodated in the centres of the State Agency for

Refugees with interpretation to access different services.

There has been a growing trend of former applicants working as interpreters during the

asylum procedure. This was seen in 2022 in Ireland⁹³⁶ and Lithuania, where persons

registering for temporary protection were assisted by their fellow citizens in registration and

other procedures. This practice proved to be very effective as the Ukrainian interpreters had

experience with the migration patterns and the trauma associated with the war.⁹³⁷

4.11.3. Interpretation at the borders

NGOs have repeatedly reported inadequate efforts by national authorities at

the EU’s borders to overcome language and cultural barriers due to a lack of

interpretation services and poor translations of information. This often

prevents migrants from meaningfully understanding their rights.⁹³⁸

In addition, reports suggested that some individuals who were returned to the

border of Bulgaria were requested to sign untranslated papers and were not provided with

interpretation.⁹³⁹ Similarly, in Poland, individuals allegedly pushed back to Belarus by Border

Guards were not provided with information in a language they understood.⁹⁴⁰ While assessing

the need for an interpreter in a case of detention at the border, the Administrative Court of

226

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

Bialystok confirmed that digital translation tools used by the Border Guard in Poland may

suffice if correct information is conveyed. An Amnesty International report mentioned how, in

the framework of an informal cross-border expulsion policy, Lithuanian authorities disregarded

procedures and failed to provide adequate interpretation to asylum seekers.⁹⁴¹

The importance of interpretation in the context of the border procedure was reiterated also by

UNHCR in its recommendation to the French and Czech EU Presidencies.⁹⁴²

A lack of interpreters at the borders for some languages spoken by minorities was highlighted

by NGOs in Spain. As a result, some interviews were conducted in a language other than the

one spoken by the applicant or in certain cases over the phone.⁹⁴³ To address some of the

gaps, UNHCR funded the setting up of an interpretation service specialised in African

languages, to support stakeholders involved in sea arrivals and help with interpretation in

reception centres, medical services and detention.

A new call for tender was launched by Frontex to provide reliable, flexible and high-quality

interpretation and cultural mediation services in support of its operational activities at the

EU’s borders. The contract provides for 112 interpreters and cultural mediators to provide in-

person and remote interpretation and a pool of 20 interpreters for rapid deployment who are

on 24/7 standby and can work remotely.⁹⁴⁴

In the context of Frontex operations, a group of interpreters deployed in Greece, Italy and the

Canary Islands launched a petition calling for better working conditions.⁹⁴⁵ Addressing the

issue, Frontex specified that the company which was contracted to provide interpretation

services is responsible to ensure its employees a remuneration in compliance with applicable

social and labour laws. In addition, the agency wrote a letter to the contractor expressing

concern, reminded them of the contractual obligations and contacted the signatories of the

petition to clarify the issue.⁹⁴⁶

4.11.4. Interpretation in the health care system

Interpretation in the context of health care was an area of focus in some

EU+ countries. For example, in 2022 France continued to reinforce

interpretation services for asylum applicants requiring health care,⁹⁴⁷ and the

Department for Civil Liberties and Immigration in Italy announced a national

project to define the training curriculum of the transcultural mediator in the

health sector.⁹⁴⁸

The Health Service Executive in Ireland launched a public procurement to offer standardised

translation/interpretation services in all health services in early 2022,⁹⁴⁹ while in Switzerland,

civil society organisations recommended that information be provided in a language

understood by the applicant when accessing health and social services.⁹⁵⁰

Hospitals in Greece faced critical shortages in interpreting services to ensure communication

with patients, especially for languages like Bangla, Tigrinya, Somali or other African dialects.⁹⁵¹

UNHCR provided support with interpretation at hospitals.

In support of interpreters, Translators without Borders and Oxfam published a tip sheet to

address sociolinguistic barriers on sensitive topics and to support their mental health.⁹⁵²

227

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

Section 4.12.

Country of origin

information

The recast QD, Article 4(3a) specifies that

Country of origin information (COI)

the assessment of an application for

refers to up-to-date, reliable

international protection must take account

information on countries of origin,

of all relevant facts about the applicant’s

habitual residence, and transit or

country of origin. Along the same lines, the

return countries which is used to

recast APD, Article 10(3b) stipulates that

assess an application for international

precise and timely information on the

protection.i COI reports can address

general situation in countries of origin of

various topics in a specific country, for

applicants and, where necessary, in

example the socio-economic, legal,

countries through which they have transited

political, human rights and

is to be obtained from various sources, such

humanitarian situation at a given time.

as the EUAA, UNHCR, the Council of Europe

and other relevant international

organisations.

228

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

Key developments in the production of COI in 2022 centred around improving methodologies,

investing in new technologies and researchers, improving collaboration with other researchers

based in Europe (for example in national COI units and civil society organisations working in

the country of origin), and producing information rapidly to address new crisis situations.

4.12.1. Enhancing capacity and improving

methodologies

In 2022, several methodological updates were implemented, without any

major institutional changes to national COI units.

With the increasing number of asylum applications in EU+ countries, there

were some challenges in the production of COI due to limited staff. Greece,

for example, noted that an increase in queries was difficult to address by the

current pool of staff. To address capacity issues, Ireland recruited two new COI researchers.

Acknowledging the importance of sound methodology in conducting COI research and

producing COI outputs, EU+ countries generally provide all newly-recruited experts with

advanced training on COI methodology. They often rely on the EUAA’s methodological

guidelines.

When the German COI unit recruited new staff, it used the opportunity to review internal

processes and streamline product portfolios. In addition, various working groups dealt with

specific methodological aspects, such as interviewing external experts, fact-finding missions

and OSINT.

Some countries, such as Norway, conduct quality surveys with the aim of gathering feedback

on Landinfos services. Norway also looked into the phenomenon of ‘confirmation bias’, which

is the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one’s existing beliefs or theories.

COI teams explored new ways of collecting and analysing data from open data sources to

produce actionable intelligence. For example, the COI team in Norway conducted seminars on

Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT), internet surveillance, IT tools and general awareness.

Likewise, Austria continued to develop its open-source information project. In Belgium,

CEDOCA created a working group on statistics to better understand methodologies and data

visualisations in reports.

Countries invested in new technological channels. For example, Austria introduced new

software, such as Content Management Systems and a reference management system. The

SMA in Sweden put efforts to renew and modernise its COI portal, Lifos. In Norway, podcasts

and tutorials were made available on www.landinfo.no. They address various countries and

topics, such as Iraq (the situation for LGBTIQ people), Yemen (the civil register, ID documents

and passports), Ukraine (population) and Lebanon (the economic situation).

Social media was also of key interest. The French COI unit improved work methods on social

media channels and developed a secure process for working with social networks. Germany

intensified the use of social media (ACLED⁹⁵³ and geolocation), while Austria included social

media as a separate part of COI research.

229

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

4.12.2. Collaborating on producing accurate

information

Cooperation and information-exchange among COI researchers are essential

to produce accurate, reliable and up-to-date information on the situation in

countries of origins.

Various training sessions, seminars, briefs and study visits were organised in

2022 with COI units and immigration authorities to share best practices. For

example, Germany participated in COI briefings for EU Member States under migration

pressure, within the framework of the Bilateral Mentoring Scheme (BMS). The new qualification

tool, BMS, is supported by the EUAA and was launched on the initiative of national COI units. It

aims to improve cooperation between COI experts, foster personal development and

strengthen methodology. Experts from the COI units of France, Germany and Greece actively

participated in the BMS.

Switzerland focused on improving cooperation with countries outside of the EU and it

organised study visits for the Turkish PMM to the Swiss COI unit, in the framework of the

EUAA/PMM roadmap.⁹⁵⁴

Finally, strengthening cooperation with local organisations and local activists was an objective

for Austria, which, for instance, launched quantitative surveys to strengthen COI methodology,

such as assessing the socio-economic situation of urban populations in countries of origin and

quantitative surveys of residents of selected cities.

4.12.3. The focus of COI reports

COI units continued to focus on the most common countries of origin of

asylum applicants in Europe, namely Afghanistan, Syria, Iran and Iraq.⁹⁵⁵ In

addition, geopolitical instability in 2022 led COI units to research new

countries of origin of asylum applicants. For instance, Burundi was a new

country of interest for Slovenia and Switerland.

Examples of reports released in 2022 by COI national teams and by UNHCR:

the security and human rights situation in Afghanistan⁹⁵⁶

the security situation in Algeria⁹⁵⁷

the security situation in Ethiopia⁹⁵⁸

Internet and social media⁹⁵⁹ and criminal prosecution of Christian converts⁹⁶⁰ in Iran

honour crimes⁹⁶¹ in Iraq and the situation in Mosul⁹⁶²

UNHCR published COI for case officers to assist in applying UNHCR guidance on

Iraq

UNCHR published position papers on returns to Mali,⁹⁶³ Ukraine,⁹⁶⁴ Ethiopia⁹⁶⁵ and

Gaza.⁹⁶⁶ A position paper on the conflict of North and South Kivu, Ituri and human

rights situation⁹⁶⁷gave up-to-date information about the Democratic Republic of the

Congo

the situation of LGBTIQ individuals⁹⁶⁸ in Iran

230

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

health care services availability and accessibility in Damascus, Rural Damascus,

Tartous and Latakia⁹⁶⁹and treatment upon return⁹⁷⁰

military service⁹⁷¹ and security apparatus⁹⁷² in Syria

human rights and a focus on the situation of women and girls and the de facto

state’s administration of justice⁹⁷³ in Afghanistan and the security situation following

the Taliban’s takeover in Afghanistan⁹⁷⁴

COI teams closely followed the evolving security situation in Türkiye and Ethiopia, in particular

in the Tigray region. They also collected information on Angola, Jordan, Lebanon, Somalia and

Sudan. For instance, Sweden released new COI reports on Tigrayans and their situation

outside of Tigray,⁹⁷⁵ Sudan,⁹⁷⁶ and South Sudan and the area of Abyei.⁹⁷⁷

EU+ countries followed the situation in Latin America, especially in Chile, Colombia, Peru and

Venezuela. For example, Sweden published a report on Chile in April 2022.⁹⁷⁸ For the first

time in many years, Germany conducted a fact-finding mission to Colombia together with the

Swiss COI unit.

India and Pakistan were also highlighted in various national COI publications.

Some COI units relied on desk research, while others, for example France and Norway,

organised fact-finding missions. Many countries, however, faced challenges in accessing

specific countries due to fewer flights. There was also a lack of experts to interview in

Afghanistan, Iran, Russia, Syria and Ukraine. Croatia reported difficulties in verifying specific

information with sources in certain countries.

Box 5. COI on Russia and Ukraine

Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, COI units received many requests for

information on the security situation in Ukraine and Russia. In response, the

EUAA, national administrations and civil society organisations published daily

information, articles, fact sheets and analytical reports on these two countries.

The EUAA published a report on Medical Country of Origin Information (MedCOI): Russia⁹⁷⁹ in

September 2022, and two COI reports on military service⁹⁸⁰ and political opposition⁹⁸¹ in

December 2022. These reports helped national case officers in individually assessing

applications for international protection lodged by Russian nationals.

The COI unit in Norway published a report on military service and mobilisation in Russia⁹⁸²

and the COI team in Sweden published different types of Ukrainian residence permits.⁹⁸³ The

Romanian National Council for Refugees released a report on the human rights situation in

Russia.⁹⁸⁴ The COI team in France produced a weekly watch on military mobilisation in Russia,

and regular, management-level reporting in Germany focused on recent developments in

Ukraine.

It became evident that the situation in Russia and Ukraine became a main area of focus at the

expense of other geographical regions. Norway noted that unsettled situations in several

countries will generate a need for information, such as projections of future outcomes, that

may be difficult to meet.

231

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

Civil society organisations play a key role in producing COI from the ground. Their annual

reports often contribute to a better understanding of the situation in countries of origin. For

instance, the World Report 2023 by Human Rights Watch summarised human rights conditions

in over 100 countries worldwide in 2022.⁹⁸⁵ Amnesty International also publishes a yearly

report on the state of the world’s human rights. In 2022, COI publications from civil society

organisations also focused on the situation of LGBTIQ individuals in their country of origin, for

example the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA)’s

annual report on the human rights situation of LGBTIQ people.

The ACCORD department of the Austrian Red Cross manages a COI system, ECOI.net, with

information on political, humanitarian and human rights topics in countries of origin. As in

previous years, in 2022 they continued with a query service for asylum lawyers, refugee

counsels and officers deciding on claims for asylum.⁹⁸⁶ The organisation also publishes

reports, which in 2022 focused on Eritrea, Iran, Pakistan and Russia. They also produce Armed

Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED) overviews, which highlighted Afghanistan, Iraq and

Somalia. Regular country briefings were also published on Afghanistan and Iran.

Asylos, an NGO working on increasing the accessibility and importance of high-quality COI in

the asylum procedure, started quarterly informal meetings in June 2022 with COI experts from

civil society organisations. The aim is to exchange information on best practices, challenges

and new publications, conduct peer reviews and explore opportunities for collaboration. The

group also offers commentaries on COI produced by governmental and intergovernmental

COI units, as well as by the EUAA. In line with its overall mission, Asylos implemented a project

which addressed gaps in COI on stateless people and produced a COI report on stateless

Palestinians. Under the initiative “Emergency COI Repositories”, Asylos created repositories

for Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, Türkiye and Ukraine.⁹⁸⁷

Civil society organisations continued to produce material on the Middle East region, in

particular on Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. Asylos and Clifford Chance published monthly

COI on Afghanistan.⁹⁸⁸ The Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit (AREU) analysed the

situation of vulnerable groups since the transition of power in Afghanistan.⁹⁸⁹ The Norwegian

Refugee Council issued a report on the impact of housing, land and property rights on returns

to Sinjar in Iraq,⁹⁹⁰ and the International Crisis Group (ICG) published a paper on governance

and security in the Sinjar district.⁹⁹¹

Many COI reports by civil society organisations concentrated on the African continent in 2022.

The Romanian National Council for Refugees (CNRR) depicted the human rights situation in

Cameroon.⁹⁹² Political participation, rule of law, the stability of democratic institutions and

other fundamental rights in Sierra Leone were discussed in a Bertelsmann Stiftung

publication.⁹⁹³ The International Crisis Group continued its ongoing field research in Sudan

and the Tigray region in Ethiopia and published analytical reports and briefings on the

political, security and human rights situation, such as security-related developments in the

Tigray conflict.⁹⁹⁴

For the Asian region, reports were published by civil society organisations on Bangladesh,

India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. For example, in May 2022 Amnesty International published a

report on the impact of the economic crisis on the Sri Lanka’s population and on their social

rights).⁹⁹⁵ In addition, Equal Ground and the Centre for International Human Rights of

Northwestern Pritzker School of Law submitted a report on the Violations by Sri Lanka of the

Civil and Political Rights of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex and

Questioning/Queer (LGBTIQ) at the 135^th Session of the Human Rights Committee.⁹⁹⁶

232

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

A challenge that seems to persist, as highlighted by civil society organisations, relates to the

lack of accessibility and user-friendliness of COI databases and the lack of multilinguistic

information, as COI material is mostly available in English. In addition, there seems to be an

imbalance between countries of origin for which a high number of COI reports are available

and countries for which no or limited information exists.⁹⁹⁷ To mitigate this, UNHCR continued

sharing monthly COI bulletins in Spain.⁹⁹⁸

There also seems to be a lack of data on intersex applicants and their situation in countries of

origin.⁹⁹⁹ Concerns were raised by an NGO about whether authorities regularly use accurate

and up-to-date COI in the assessment of asylum applications,¹⁰⁰⁰ and it alerted about the

possibility of bias in the use of COI by authorities.¹⁰⁰¹ In addition, civil society organisations

noted that applicants may be at times poorly informed about the importance of COI in the

assessment of their application and about their right to suggest further documents to support

their application.¹⁰⁰²

Box 6. COI reports by the EUAA in 2022

Afghanistan: developments since the Taliban takeover on 15 August 2021 targeted

attacks,¹⁰⁰³ the security situation¹⁰⁰⁴ and key socio-economic indicators¹⁰⁰⁵

Afghan refugees in Pakistan¹⁰⁰⁶ was updated. It describes their legal status and provides

information on their socio-economic situation in Pakistan

Iraq: targeting and treatment of persons belonging to specific profiles¹⁰⁰⁷ and the security

situation¹⁰⁰⁸

Syria: the security situation¹⁰⁰⁹ the targeting of certain profiles and groups in the

country¹⁰¹⁰ and the socio-economic context in Damascus city¹⁰¹¹

Colombia¹⁰¹²

Medical Country of Origin Information (MedCOI): Nigeria¹⁰¹³ on the overall epidemiological

situation and challenges in accessing health care

Female Genital Mutilation (FGM/C) in Ethiopia¹⁰¹⁴ maps FGM/C practices and

trends at the national and regional levels

Female Genital Mutilation (FGM/C) in Mali¹⁰¹⁵

233

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

Section 4.13.

Statelessness

in the context

of asylum

The 1954 UN Convention relating to the

Statelessness is a legal anomaly which

Status of Stateless Persons defines a

affects people who are not considered

stateless person as someone “who is not

a national by any state. Lacking any

considered as a national by any state under

state’s protection means stateless

the operation of its law”.¹⁰¹⁶ Nationality is the

persons may not be able to fully

legal bond between a person and a state,

exercise their fundamental rights,

and international law establishes the right of

including access to education, health

every person to a nationality. States are free

care, housing, employment, social

to regulate nationality, but this must be

welfare and documentation.

within the limits of international law, for

example by being non-discriminatory and

non-arbitrary, avoiding statelessness and

ensuring gender equality.

234

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

Nationality is generally acquired at birth by descent (jus sanguinis), place of birth (jus soli) or

later in life based on residence, marriage or adoption. A person may be born stateless if the

law in their country is discriminatory and does not grant nationality to certain ethnic groups or

allow women to pass on nationality to their children. Children born into migrant communities

may also be at risk of statelessness when the country they are born in does not grant

nationality based on the principle of jus soli and they are unable to obtain the nationality of

their parents. One reason for this may be that their parents are refugees who cannot

approach the embassy of their country of origin to request nationality for their children out of

fear of persecution. People may also lose their nationality later in life. This may be as a result

of discriminatory laws or challenges acquiring a new nationality after state secession.

To eliminate statelessness in the EU, it is important that Member States have procedures in

place to ensure that stateless persons are recognised and that a specific path exists for them

to become citizens of the country in which they reside.

While stateless persons and refugees are two distinct categories in international law, a

person can be both a refugee and stateless. In the context of asylum, statelessness may also

be relevant to the determination process for an asylum application as in many instances the

reasons why a person left their country are linked to reasons why they are stateless. It is

therefore important that both claims are assessed and both statuses addressed explicitly. In

instances where international protection is not granted on one ground, statelessness may

comprise another ground based on which the person may still necessitate international

protection.

4.13.1. Identifying stateless persons and their rights

Legislation, practices and policies vary across EU+ countries on the criteria

needed to be identified as a stateless person. In many cases, these

individuals may be registered under the nationality of their country of former

habitual residence or as having ‘unknown’ nationality. Thus, the data

available on statelessness may not be entirely representative of the reality

across EU+ countries.

Failing to properly identify statelessness during the asylum procedure can have a direct

impact on the outcome of the case. For example, statelessness in the country of origin may be

wholly or partially linked to a fear of being persecuted. If the applicant is not identified as

stateless, the need for protection may not be adequately addressed during the procedure.

In addition, the status which is recorded during the registration of an application (e.g. national,

stateless or unknown) has an impact on the nationality rights of the applicant’s children and

access to processes, such as family reunification and naturalisation. As such, identifying

potential cases of statelessness and referring the cases to a statelessness determination

process are of paramount importance.

235

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

4.13.1.1. Stateless Palestinians

Recognising Palestinians as stateless persons varies across EU+ countries.

According to the European Network on Statelessness (ENS), several EU+

countries do not recognise Palestinians as stateless during the asylum

procedure. This has created additional obstacles for Palestinians trying to

access international protection, and it may impact the children of Palestinians

if they cannot access the nationality of the country in which they were

born.¹⁰¹⁷

The main reason for divergence in practices is because EU+ countries interpret Article 1(D) of

the 1951 Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees (1951 Convention) differently.

According to the article, the 1951 Convention

“shall not apply to persons who are at present receiving from organs or agencies

of the United Nations other than the United Nations High Commissioner for

Refugees protection or assistance. When such protection or assistance has

ceased for any reason, without the position of such persons being definitively

settled in accordance with the relevant resolutions adopted by the General

Assembly of the United Nations, these persons shall ipso facto be entitled to the

benefits of this Convention”.¹⁰¹⁸

Given the current situation in Palestine, the ENS and several civil society and international

organisations have questioned the ability of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for

Palestine Refugees in the Near East’s (UNRWA) to protect Palestinian nationals.¹⁰¹⁹ Moreover,

in March 2022, UNHCR emphasised the need to adequately assess the protection needs of

Palestinians from Gaza and encouraged countries not to forcibly return people to a dire

situation without access to support.¹⁰²⁰

The ENS has also asserted that if UNRWA is not in a position to protect a Palestinian person,

then this person should not fall within the scope of Article 1(D) and the case should be

examined on the merits. In such cases, it is important to verify whether a person has another

nationality, as the ENS considers that all Palestinians who do not hold a second nationality

should be considered stateless.

Recent jurisprudence on the matter has centred around core issues with UNRWA’s ability to

fulfil its mandate and the circumstances in which an applicant is considered to be registered

with UNWRA.¹⁰²¹ In January 2022, the Dutch Council of State confirmed that Palestinian

applicants should only fall within the scope of Article 1(D) of the 1951 Convention if they were

actively supported by UNRWA prior to requesting international protection in the Netherlands.

The State Secretary for Justice and Security v Applicant concerned a Palestinian applicant

who was born in Iraq and later moved to Egypt, where he resided without a legal permit. The

Council of State noted that the applicant had never lived in an area supported by UNRWA but

the applicant’s father had been registered with UNRWA, meaning that he had a theoretical

right to UNRWA support. The Council of State concluded that the applicant could not be

reasonably expected to move to an area where he had never been in order to access support

and, thus, confirmed that Article 1(D) was not applicable.

Likewise, in March 2022, the Dutch Council of State concluded that an applicant from the

Gaza Strip did not fall within the scope of Article 1(D) as, prior to his arrival in Europe, he had

resided in Libya for 3 years.

236

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

Following a similar line of interpretation, in April 2022 the Belgian CALL confirmed that an

applicant of Palestinian origin must have been personally registered with UNRWA in order to

fall within the scope of Article 1(D). CALL further noted that applicants whose parents were

registered with UNRWA but did not receive UNRWA assistance themselves should be

examined under Article 1(2) of the 1951 Convention.

In March 2022, the CJEU ruled on the cessation of UNRWA protection in the case of N.B. and

A.B. v Secretary of State for the Home Department (UK). The applicant claimed that she could

not access appropriate education and medical assistance for her severely disabled son in the

Al Bass camp in Lebanon, where the family was registered with UNRWA. The Secretary of

State had rejected their claim for refugee status because they were registered with UNRWA

and had received, and were likely to continue to receive, support in Lebanon. While the

Secretary of State admitted that the child had been discriminated against on the basis of his

disability, this discrimination did not reach the level required to qualify as persecution. When

assessing whether UNRWA’s protection had ceased, the CJEU concluded that national

authorities should consider the applicant’s circumstances at the time when they left UNRWA’s

area of operation and at the time when their request was being examined. The CJEU added

that the burden of proof lies with the Member State to illustrate that the applicants would

receive UNRWA’s protection if they were to return. The CJEU also found that assistance

provided by civil society organisations may be considered if the organisation had a formal and

stable cooperation agreement with UNRWA.

While these court judgments help to form standard operating procedures in EU+ countries,

there is still a lot of unclarity surrounding stateless Palestinians and Article 1(D). To this end,

the ENS has issued a number of recommendations, including accession to the relevant

international conventions, facilitating access to naturalisation, ensuring access to resettlement,

and enacting and implementing fair and accessible procedures during a statelessness

determination with procedural safeguards for Palestinians.¹⁰²²

4.13.1.2. Stateless children of asylum seekers and refugee parents

According to the ENS, only one-half of EU+ countries have sufficient legal

safeguards to prevent children from growing up without a nationality.¹⁰²³ In

some countries, children born to stateless refugees inherit their parents’

stateless status. At times, parents cannot approach the embassy of their

country of origin to confirm their child’s nationality out of fear of

persecution.¹⁰²⁴ In 2022, there were some positive advancements made by

national courts.

In Spain, the Provincial Court of Guipúzcoa granted citizenship to a child who was born to a

Cameroonian woman during her journey from Cameroon to Spain to seek international

protection. The court requested the Central Civil Registry to register the birth, after both the

Cameroonian and Moroccan embassies failed to register the child’s birth or grant her

nationality. The judge presiding over the case noted that “if I had taken the decision based

solely on the law and standard procedures, the result would have been unjust towards the girl,

because we would have failed to recognise one of her fundamental rights”.^{lvi, 1025} In an

interview with Radio Cordoba, the judge hoped the case would set a new precedent for other

stateless children arriving in Spain.¹⁰²⁶

^lvi Unofficial translation.

237

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

In Ireland, the Supreme Court confirmed that a child who was granted Irish nationality on the

basis that his father was a recognised refugee at the time of his birth could not have his Irish

nationality revoked because his father’s status had been subsequently withdrawn.¹⁰²⁷

While jurisprudence seems to have taken a protection-oriented approach for the right of

stateless persons, including in the context of asylum, additional safeguards are still needed in

many EU+ countries. The ENS has issued a number of recommendations to EU+ countries to

ensure that effective procedures are in place for statelessness determination and that the best

interests of children of refugees born in exile are taken into consideration.¹⁰²⁸

The UNCRC made recommendations to Cyprus and the Netherlands in 2022. In June 2022,

the Committee recommended that Cyprus implements new safeguards to reduce

statelessness by “[e]stablish[ing] legal safeguards, including legislation and procedures,

including removal of fees for birth registration[…]”.¹⁰²⁹ The Committee also urged Cyprus to

“[f]acilitate the acquisition of nationality for children who would otherwise be stateless,

regardless of their parents’ citizenship, residence, legal or marital status, with particular

attention given to children born to refugee, asylum-seeking, migrant or stateless parents, and

regardless of the existence of the family link before the departure from the country of

origin”.¹⁰³⁰

In March 2022, the Committee stated their concern about the Dutch Nationality Act, which

requires stateless children applying for nationality to have 3 years of legal residency.¹⁰³¹ While

the Dutch parliament has since passed two new bills which still need to be adopted by the

senate in 2023, the ENS is concerned that the changes do not go far enough to guarantee

that stateless children born in the Netherlands will have access to the rights afforded by

international law.¹⁰³²

4.13.2. Statelessness in the context of Russia’s invasion

of Ukraine

UNHCR has estimated that there were approximately 82,500 stateless

persons living in Ukraine in 2018, of which around 6,000 had legal residence.

This indicates that a high number of stateless people from Ukraine lack the

necessary documents to access temporary protection in the EU. Under the

Temporary Protection Directive, EU Member States are not required to

extend temporary protection to all categories of stateless persons. In fact,

stateless persons are only eligible for temporary protection if:

They were granted refugee status in Ukraine;

Their family members are Ukrainian nationals or recognised beneficiaries of

international protection in Ukraine; or

They held a permanent resident permit in Ukraine and are unable to return to their

country of former habitual residence.

Some countries have extended temporary protection to stateless persons, but in others, they

must apply for international protection.

238

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

Moreover, pre-existing administrative policies which require a form of identification to cross

the Ukrainian side of the border have created additional obstacles for stateless persons who

wish to flee Ukraine and seek protection EU+ countries.

For more information on this topic, please refer to the EUAA’s comprehensive

report, “Providing Temporary Protection to Displaced Persons from Ukraine:

A Year in Review”.

4.13.3. Changing legislation

With the number of applications for international protection significantly

growing in 2022, it is probable that more stateless asylum seekers have

arrived in the EU. Depending on national legislation, it can be challenging for

asylum seekers and beneficiaries of international protection to be officially

recognised as stateless. Indeed, results of an external evaluation carried out

by UNHCR suggested that the targets established under the Global Action

Plan to End Statelessness were unlikely to be met before the agreed target date of 2024.¹⁰³³

Nonetheless, several positive changes occurred in 2022 which will help increase recognition

and ensure that the rights of stateless persons are protected. These developments often have

a direct impact on stateless persons who are or have been through the asylum process, as

well as their children.

On 23 March 2022, Austria amended the Citizenship Act to allow children born in Austria to

apply for nationality when they reach the age of majority within a period of 3 years under

facilitated requirements if they would otherwise be stateless.¹⁰³⁴ The previous legislation

allowed them to apply within 2 years. This development is important for many groups of

children, including those who were born to applicants or beneficiaries of international

protection and were unable to inherit citizenship from their parents. UNHCR advocated that

foreign children should be able to acquire citizenship earlier, without having to wait until after

their 18^thbirthday.¹⁰³⁵ The organisation also urged for the introduction of a specific

statelessness determination procedure.¹⁰³⁶

In March 2022, Belgium pledged to introduce a new legal status for stateless persons which

would give them the right to legally reside in Belgium if they cannot return to their country of

habitual residence.¹⁰³⁷ In December 2022, amendments to the Belgian Nationality Code

introduced important changes relating to stateless children (Article 10). It was legally

established that no recognition as a stateless person would be henceforth required to grant

Belgian nationality to a child bord in Belgium without a nationality. This was always the

intention of the legislator in the Belgian Nationality Code, but in practice the civil registrar

would sometimes ask for official recognition of statelessness status. The amended Article 10

also introduced the possibility for the civil registrar to seek advice from the Public Prosecutor

in the event of doubt about the lack of nationality of a child.

In Finland, the Ministry of the Interior proposed and submitted amendments to the Nationality

Act to the parliament in April 2022. The parliament did not manage to consider the proposal

by the end of the electoral term (29 March 2023) and it was allowed to lapse. The next

239

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

government will decide if the changes will be proposed again. If approved, the definitions of a

stateless person will be updated to be in line with international treaties. Precisely, stateless

persons would no longer be divided into voluntarily stateless and involuntarily stateless.¹⁰³⁸

This will make it easier for stateless asylum seekers to be recognised and ensure that all

stateless asylum seekers and beneficiaries of international protection are afforded the same

rights, regardless of the reason for which they became stateless.

In Portugal, the revised Nationality Regulation came into force in April 2022 which made it

easier for children born in Portugal to applicants or beneficiaries of international protection to

acquire citizenship. Under the revised regulation, a child born on the territory can be granted

nationality if one of the parents is a legal resident or one of the parents has been residing on

the territory for more than 1 year (irrespective of their residency status).^{lvii, 1039} The new

amendments also make it easier for children who were born to foreign parents, prior to the bill

coming into effect, to access naturalisation by removing the language and residency

requirements in the following cases:

At least one parent is a legal resident;

At least one parent has lived in Portugal for 5 years or more prior to the submission

of the naturalisation request (irrespective of the parent’s residency status); or

The child has completed at least 1 year of pre-school, primary or secondary

education in Portugal.¹⁰⁴⁰

On 29 March 2022, Spain adopted a Royal Decree which guarantees stateless persons

access to the national reception system for the duration of the Stateless Determination

Procedure. This will ensure that children in the Stateless Determination Procedure have

access to education and other integration programmes.¹⁰⁴¹

In the Netherlands, where there are approximately 40,000 individuals registered as

‘nationality unknown’,¹⁰⁴² two bills on statelessness were passed by the parliament on 31 May

2022. The first bill is a step towards introducing a new stateless determination procedure

which will be judicial in nature. This will facilitate the recognition of stateless persons arriving

in the Netherlands and reduce the number of applicants being registered as having

‘nationality unknown’. The second bill amends the Dutch Nationality Act to allow stateless

children to apply for naturalisation after 5 years of habitual residence. Both bills will need to be

approved by the Senate in 2023.¹⁰⁴³

While this is a positive change that will facilitate stateless children of asylum seekers and

beneficiaries of international protection to access nationality, the bills fall short of the

recommendations made by the UNCRC during the combined fifth and sixth periodic review of

the Netherlands. The recommendations which were published in March 2022 called on the

Netherlands to “[g]uarantee all stateless children born or present within the territory of the

State party the right to acquire nationality irrespective of residency status” and “[i]mplement

measures for ensuring that children with an unknown nationality, a status that leaves them

unable to be registered as stateless and obtain international protection, do not remain with

such a status for a prolonged period of time”.¹⁰⁴⁴

lvii

Children of diplomats are excluded.

240

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

4.13.4. Improving the situation of stateless persons

In 2022, the ENS continued to organise the Stateless Journeys Campaign, an

initiative which has developed different tools to support people working with

stateless persons, such as guidelines to encourage frontline practitioners to

“recognise, record, refer and read up”. Guidelines are currently available on

several topics, including children’s right to a nationality, asylum registration

and screening, detention and return, family reunification and integration.¹⁰⁴⁵ :

In Belgium, the NGO NANSEN produced several reports to inform stateless persons and their

legal representatives. The reports are available in French on their website and cover topics

such as: the treatment of Palestinians in Gaza and the need to grant them international

protection,¹⁰⁴⁶ the right to Belgian nationality for children of Palestinian origin,¹⁰⁴⁷ statelessness

among members of the Bidoun community in Kuwait and their need for protection,¹⁰⁴⁸ and how

to prevent the children of Ukrainian refugees in Belgium from becoming stateless.¹⁰⁴⁹

In Bulgaria, the Foundation for Access to Rights organised an online webinar entitled

“Palestinian Refugees Seeking Protection in Bulgaria: Practical issues and recent case law” in

September 2022. The organisation also produced a report on practical problems in the

international protection system in Bulgaria and the application of Article 1(D) of the

1951 Convention.¹⁰⁵⁰

In the Netherlands, Asylos implemented a project to address information gaps for stateless

persons. The organisation also worked on the production of a COI report on the situation of

stateless Palestinians in Lebanon and a principles document for conducting COI research on

statelessness.¹⁰⁵¹

In France, OFPRA updated the welcome booklet in November 2022 aimed at newly-

recognised stateless persons.¹⁰⁵² In Malta, the aditus foundation published a document with a

number of proposals in view of the upcoming 2022 national elections. These included

recommendations for a new stateless determination procedure.¹⁰⁵³

In March 2022, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights issued concluding

observations on the third periodic report on Czechia. The committee expressed its concern

that, under the Aliens Act, the scope of the statelessness determination procedure is limited

and it does not provide sufficient legal security for stateless persons. It was also concerned

that such persons face difficulties in obtaining permanent residence, and under the

Citizenship Act, children who would otherwise be stateless would only acquire nationality if

both parents are stateless and at least one of them has a residence permit (Article 2(2)).¹⁰⁵⁴

Following up on the committee’s recommendations, relevant legislative amendments were

prepared to the Aliens Act, which are expected to come into force in the second half of 2023.

In May 2022, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination issued its

concluding observations on the combined eighteenth to twentieth periodic reports on

Luxembourg. The committee noted the absence of specific legislation on statelessness,

including on the statelessness determination procedure, and recommended that the

authorities adopt specific legislation.¹⁰⁵⁵ The UNHRC issued its concluding observations on the

fourth periodic report on Luxembourg and encouraged the government to adopt legislation

regulating the procedure to determine the status of statelessness and that clearly guarantees

the right to stay for applicants with a statelessness status and that this right is automatically

granted after obtaining the stateless status.¹⁰⁵⁶

241

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

In 2022, integration policies were primarily geared at the rapid inclusion of persons in need of

temporary protection from Ukraine. National forms of protection were often applied to

displaced persons from Ukraine prior to the activation of the Temporary Protection Directive.

In parallel, some EU+ countries continued with initiatives which offered a right to stay to former

applicants who could not be returned and who had reached a certain level of integration.

The trend continued in 2022 to involve a range of stakeholders and improve collaboration for

the integration of beneficiaries of international protection. The urgent, large-scale need to

provide integration support for persons in need of temporary protection further catalysed this

process, and EU+ countries piloted some new, innovative ways of working together in the

integration of persons in need of protection.

The increase in asylum applications often impacted and caused delays in delivering residence

and travel documents to beneficiaries of international protection, which risked delaying their

access to other services and rights. As seen in previous years, courts retained an important

role in shaping the interpretation of grounds and procedures for reviewing or withdrawing

international protection.

4.14.1. Granting international protection: Recognition

rates

The recognition rate refers to the number of positive outcomes as a

percentage of the total number of decisions on applications for

international protection. For reporting in the Asylum Report, positive

decisions calculated in the recognition rate include EU-harmonised

statuses only (i.e. refugee and subsidiary protection). At times, the

recognition rate which includes national forms of protection may be

presented for countries where there is a considerable difference with

the recognition rate of EU-harmonised statuses.^lviii

The recognition rate for specific nationalities of applicants can indicate

which citizenships are granted protection more or less frequently.

4.14.1.1. Recognition rates at first instance

The overall EU+ recognition rate for first instance decisions on asylum

applications was 39% in 2022. This means that out of 646,000 decisions

issued, 252,000 were positive, granting the applicant either refugee status or

subsidiary protection. The recognition rate went up by 5 percentage points

compared to last year and was the highest since 2017. The rise was mainly

due to more positive decisions being issued to Syrians (see Section 4.14.1.2.).

Most positive decisions at first instance granted refugee status (149,000 or 59% of all positive

decisions) and subsidiary protection was granted in the remaining 103,000 cases (41%). As a

lviii

Persons granted an authorisation to stay for humanitarian reasons are defined by Eurostat:

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Glossary:Asylum_decision

243

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

result, the share of positive decisions granting refugee status declined for the second

consecutive year.

Аsylum applicants who were not eligible for international protection as defined in the

recast QD may be granted an authorisation to stay for humanitarian reasons under national

law. The EU+ recognition rate of 39% excludes authorisations to stay for humanitarian reasons.

If such authorisations were included, the recognition rate for 2022 would hike to 50%. This

considerable difference is largely due to humanitarian status granted to Afghans in Germany

and Venezuelans in Spain, which combined represented more than 7 in 10 humanitarian

permissions to stay in EU+ countries.

In 2022, more women and girls received positive decisions on their protection claims than a

year earlier (45% compared to 41% in 2021). Men and boys, in turn, were granted protection in

36% of all decisions issued on their applications. However, the data available do not indicate

which applications lodged by males or females were part of family groups.

Overall, 55% of first instance decisions issued protection to minors, which is considerably

higher than for applications lodged by the 18-34 age group (33%), 35-64 age group (31%) and

applicants aged 65 years or older (30%). Nevertheless, in 2022, recognition rates were higher

than in 2021 for asylum applicants of all age groups and especially for those between 35 and

64 years of age.

In many EU+ countries, first instance recognition rates vary over time, usually because of

changes in the volume or structure of caseloads. In 2022, overall recognition rates increased

notably in some countries (see Table 3).

Table 4.2. Recognition rates in EU+ countries with notable increases in 2022

2021 (%)

2022 (%)

Bulgaria

Estonia

Latvia

Lithuania

Netherlands

Poland

Portugal

Slovakia

Slovenia

While the recognition rate also climbed in Hungary, from 58% to 86%, the overall number of

decisions was very low (35 in 2022). This is due to the fact that since 2020, applicants are

required to submit a declaration of intent at a Hungarian embassy in a non-EU country before

they can enter the country and apply for international protection (see Section 4.1).

In contrast, recognition rates dropped substantially in Austria (62% to 42%),

Switzerland (60% to 47%) and - to a lesser extent - Italy (34% to 28%), Norway (81% to 78%)

and Romania (28% to 25%). They continued to decline in Cyprus (19% to 6%), Ireland

(56% to 34%) and Malta (22% to 15%). In all other EU+ countries, recognition rates in 2022

were higher than or similar to 2021.

244

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

Recognition rates at first instance for specific nationalities

Among the 20 nationalities which received the most first instance decisions in 2022, Syrians

had the highest recognition rate at 93%. They were followed by Ukrainians (86%) and

Eritreans (84%) (see Figure 24). Other groups with relatively high recognition rates included

nationals of Mali (65%), Somalia (57%) and Afghanistan (51%).

At the other end of the spectrum, some countries in specific regions had especially low

recognition rates, such as Tunisians (2%) and Moroccans (5%) in northern Africa,

Venezuelans (4%) and Colombians (6%) in Latin America, Albanians (6%) in the Western

Balkans, as well as Bangladeshis (4%), Georgians (4%) and Pakistanis (9%).

Outside the Top 20 nationalities, recognition rates continued to be notably high for

Belarusians (85%), Yemenis (84%), Palestinians (63%), Chinese (60%) and stateless persons

(58%).^lix However, low recognition rates were more common, particularly for citizens of

countries which are exempt from visa requirements to enter the EU. These comprised

applicants from the vicinity of the EU, including Bosnia and Herzegovina, Moldova,

North Macedonia and Serbia, as well as some Latin American countries, such as Argentina,

Chile and Peru.

Syrians, Ukrainians and Eritreans had the highest recognition

rates in 2022

Figure 24. First instance recognition rates for the Top 20 nationalities with the most

decisions issued in EU+ countries, by nationality and status granted, 2022

Note: These 20 nationalities received the highest number of first instance decisions in EU+ countries in 2022. They

are ordered (from the left to the right side) in terms of the number of decisions received.

Source: Eurostat [migr_asydcfsta] as of 13 April 2023.

^lix Only nationalities with more than 1,000 decisions issued in 2022 were considered.

245

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

Overall, the recognition rate increased the most for Ukrainians (+74 percentage points from

2021) and Syrians (+22 percentage points and the most since 2016). For Ukrainian asylum

applicants, this was caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. For Syrians - who have had a

relatively high recognition rate since 2012 - the rate had dropped considerably in 2021, due to

negative decisions issued on a high number of subsequent applications in Germany, which

were submitted after a CJEU ruling on refusing to perform military service in the Syrian army

as grounds for a well-founded fear of persecution.¹⁰⁵⁷ In 2022, however, the recognition rate

for Syrians bounced to high levels again. In addition, the CGRS in Belgium, where recognition

rates for Syrians also increased significantly compared to 2021, prioritised certain files which

had a likely positive outcome, and many of these files belonged to Syrian applicants.

Afghan asylum applicants (especially in Germany) and Venezuelan applicants (especially in

Spain) were often granted humanitarian status, which permits applicants to remain in the

receiving country but is not counted towards positive decisions in the recognition rate. For

Venezuelans, 7 in every 10 decisions issued in EU+ countries granted humanitarian status,

whereas for Afghans, it was 3 in every 10 decisions. Afghans in Germany alone accounted for

almost two-fifths (27,000) of all cases in which humanitarian status was granted in 2022 in

EU+ countries, and Venezuelans in Spain for over one-quarter.

Variations in recognition rates at first instance in receiving countries

As in the past, large variations in national practices were seen in granting protection to

specific citizenships of applicants. For example, the recognition rate for Afghans was at least

44% in most countries that issued more than 200 decisions (in total 14 EU+ countries), but it

was only 16% in Switzerland, 27% in Germany and 30% in Romania (see Figure 25).

Conversely, the recognition rate for nationals of Venezuela was below 39%, except in

Iceland (93%) and Italy (73%). Similarly, the rate for Colombians did not exceed 4%, except in

Italy (28%) and France (18%). In fact, Italy continued to have recognition rates at the upper end

of the range for several citizenships, while countries with recognition rates at the lower end of

the range varied depending on the nationality.

Overall, discrepancies in recognition rates were most apparent for applicants from

Afghanistan, ranging from 16% in Switzerland to 100% in Portugal. Wide ranges also continued

for Turkish applicants (from 15% in France and Spain to 93% in Switzerland), as well as Iraqis

(from 3% in Poland to 77% in the Netherlands) and Venezuelans (from 8% in Germany to

93% in Iceland).

There are several reasons why the same nationality may have different recognition rates

across EU+ countries. For example, applicants with the same citizenship can have significantly

different profiles and protection needs or come from different regions of the same country.

Recognition rates may also differ between first-time and subsequent applications lodged by

the same nationality. Similarly, some applicants may have already received an EU protection

status in another Member State, but they submitted a new application. EU+ countries may

differ slightly in terms of their national policies and guidelines on asylum, in addition to the

interpretation of certain legal concepts. In particular, receiving countries can have different

lists of safe countries of origin and safe third countries or assess internal protection

alternatives and the level of indiscriminate violence differently, which can impact eligibility for

subsidiary protection.

246

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

Discrepancies in recognition rates were the most apparent

for Afghan, Iraqi and Turkish applicants

Figure 25. Recognition rates for nationalities receiving the most decisions at first instance,

by receiving country, 2022

Note: Each bubble represents a different EU+ country issuing more than 200 first instance decisions in 2022 for

the selected nationality. The bubble size indicates the number of first instance decisions and the placement on the

vertical axis denotes the recognition rate. The 10 nationalities presented received the most first instance decisions

in 2022 and the order is in terms of overall decisions.

Source: Eurostat [migr_asydcfsta] as of 13 April 2023.

4.14.1.2. Recognition rates at second or higher instances

If an appeal is lodged against a decision at first instance, a decision

will be taken at second instance, and higher instances become

involved after another appeal. The procedures following an appeal can

vary: in some receiving countries, the case is reviewed entirely

(de novo in fact and law), while in other countries, only the legality of

the first instance decision is assessed.

The data available do not indicate the outcome of the first instance

decision that was appealed, as a positive decision can also be

appealed. For example, a positive decision that grants fewer rights

than refugee status (subsidiary protection or humanitarian status under

national law) might be appealed. For this reason, cumulative

recognition rates for all instances are not presented, and the outcomes

at second or higher instances need to be considered separately.

247

EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM

In 2022, the recognition rate at second or higher instances was 21%, meaning that there

were 45,000 positive decisions within the total of 221,000 decisions at this level. This was

in line with the previous year (22%). In fact, in most EU+ countries, recognition rates at

second or higher instances remained more or less stable compared to 2021.

As in previous years, the overall EU+ recognition rate at higher instances was lower than at

first instance (39%). But the gap is growing. In 2022, the difference between the

EU+ recognition rate at first instance and in appeals was the largest since 2016 (see

Figure 26).

The EU+ recognition rate of 21% excludes authorisations to stay for humanitarian reasons. If

such authorisations were included, the recognition rate for 2022 at second or higher

instances would hike to 34% (still lower than the all-inclusive EU+ recognition rate at first

instance).

The difference between the EU+ recognition rate at first and

at second or higher instances was the largest since 2016

Figure 26. Outcomes of decisions on asylum applications at second or higher instances in

EU+ countries (bars), and recognition rates at first instance (yellow line) and recognition

rates at second or higher instances (red line), 2016-2022

Source: Eurostat [migr_asydcfsta] as of 13 April 2023.

Far fewer decisions at second or higher instances granted some type of EU-regulated

protection than at first instance (see Figure 27). However, two of the Top 20 nationalities

which received the most decisions in appeals (nationals of Bangladesh and Iran) received

more positive decisions at second or higher instances than at first instance.

Of the positive decisions at higher instances, three in five decisions granted refugee status

(27,000 or 60% of all positive decisions), with the remainder granting subsidiary protection

(18,000 cases or 40%). These proportions were in line with those at first instance.

248

ASYLUM REPORT 2023

As in the past 5 years, female applicants continued to be somewhat more successful in their

appeals. The recognition rate at second or higher instances was 26% for applications by

women and girls (stable from 2021), compared to 18% for applications by men and boys

(slightly lower than in 2021 when it was 20%). The gap between the female and male

recognition rates was similar at first instance (45% and 36%, respectively). However, the data

available do not indicate which applications lodged by males or females were part of family

groups.

Unlike at first instance, recognition rates at second or higher instances did not differ so much

between age groups. Minors were still granted protection at the highest rate (almost one in

four decisions at second or higher instances), while for the remaining age groups, roughly one

in every five decisions granted either refugee status or subsidiary protection. This pattern was

similar in previous years.

Refugee status and subsidiary protection were less often

granted at second or higher instances than at first instance

Figure 27. Outcomes of decisions on asylum applications at first instance compared to second

or higher instances in EU+ countries, 2022

Source: Eurostat [migr_asydcfsta] as of 13 April 2023.

Among the countries which issued at least 1,000 decisions,^lx the highest EU+ recognition rates

were in the Netherlands (57%) and Austria (52%), whereas they did not exceed 22% in others.

In fact, in two of the 13 EU+ countries with at least 1,000 decisions issued at second or higher

instances - Cyprus and Poland- the EU+ recognition rates were 0% in 2022 as very few

decisions in appeal granted refugee status (not more than 10 per country) and none granted

subsidiary protection. For both countries, this pattern was similar to that of most recent years.

Hungary was the only EU+ country which did not issue any decisions at second or higher

instances in 2022.

^lx In total, 13 EU+ countries issued at least 1,000 decisions at second or higher instances in 2022: Austria, Belgium,

Cyprus, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherland, Poland, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland.

249

Asylum Report 2023 - page 5