2013/2014 Annual Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MIND THE GAP: AN NGO PERSPECTIVE ON CHALLENGES TO ACCESSING PROTECTION IN THE COMMON EUROPEAN ASYLUM SYSTEM Annual Report 2013|2014 A project by the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE), Forum Réfugiés-Cosi, the Irish Refugee Council and the Hungarian Helsinki Committee. Acknowledgments This report was written by Kris Pollet, Hélène Soupios-David, Claire Rimmer Quaid and Silvia Cravesana of the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) as part of the Asylum Information Database (AIDA) project. The coordinating partners of the AIDA project are ECRE, Forum réfugiés-Cosi, the Hungarian Helsinki Com- mittee and the Irish Refugee Council. Chapter III of this report brings together findings from national reports produced by: Austria: Anny Knapp, Asylkoordination Ősterreich Belgium: Ruben Wissing, Belgian Refugee Council (BCHV-CBAR) Bulgaria: Iliana Savova, Bulgarian Helsinki Committee Cyprus: Corina Drousiotou and Manos Mathioudakis, Future World Center France: Claire Salignat, Forum réfugiés-Cosi Germany: Michael Kalkmann, Informationsverbund Asyl und Migration Greece: Spyros Koulocheris, Greek Council for Refugees Hungary: Marta Pardavi, Gruša Matevžič, Júlia Ivan and Anikò Bakonyi, Hungarian Helsinki Committee Ireland: Sharon Waters and Nick Henderson, Irish Refugee Council Italy: Maria de Donato, Daniela Di Rado and Daniela Maccioni, Italian Council for Refugees (CIR) Malta: Neil Falzon, aditus foundation and Katrine Camilleri, JRS Malta Netherlands: Steven Ammeraal, Frank Broekhof and Angelina Van Kampen, Dutch Council for Refugees Poland: Karolina Rusilowicz, Maja Lysienia and Ewa Ostaszewska-Zuk, Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights Sweden: George Joseph, Caritas Sweden United Kingdom: Debora Singer and Gina Clayton, Asylum Aid We would like to thank the following ECRE staff for their invaluable contributions in shaping this report: Laurent Aldenhoff, Louise Carr, Julia Zelvenskaya and Azzam Daaboul, who created the graphic design of this report. Published in Brussels, Belgium on the 9th of September 2014 by the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE). Table of contents THE AIDA PROJECT 7 INTRODUCTION 8 CHAPTER I. MAIN STATISTICAL DATA AND TRENDS 11 NUMBER OF ASYLUM APPLICANTS AND ARRIVALS AT SEA 13 1. MAIN RECEIVING COUNTRIES 14 2. MAIN COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN OF ASYLUM APPLICANTS 14 Syria 14 Russia 15 Afghanistan 15 3. AGE DISTRIBUTION OF ASYLUM APPLICANTS 15 4. RECOGNITION RATES 16 Overall recognition rate for the EU 16 Divergences in Recognition Rates for the Same Nationalities 16 CHAPTER II. KEY EU DEVELOPMENTS OCTOBER 2013 – JULY 2014 23 1. ACCESS TO THE TERRITORY: EU RESPONSES TO DEATHS IN THE MEDITERRANEAN AFTER THE INITIAL SHOCK OF THE LAMPEDUSA TRAGEDIES 25 1.1 The Task Force Mediterranean: effective EU response or business as usual? 26 1.2 The External Sea Border Surveillance Regulation and EUROSUR Regulation 28 2. FINANCING THE CEAS: THE PRICE THE EU IS PREPARED TO PAY 30 3. STRATEGIC GUIDELINES IN THE AREA OF FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE: CONSOLIDATING THE CEAS FOR LACK OF A VISION ON THE WAY FORWARD. 32 What the guidelines say 33 Further steps needed to complete the CEAS 34 4. ANOTHER CRACK IN THE DUBLIN SYSTEM - THE BULGARIAN “ASYLUM CRISIS”. 35 5. THE EU’S RESPONSE TO THE SYRIAN REFUGEE CRISIS: TOO LITTLE TOO LATE? 37 Overall high recognition rates for those fleeing Syria in the EU… 37 if they get there 39 6. EUROPE ACT NOW 40 CHAPTER III. PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS, DETENTION AND RECEPTION CONDITIONS IN 15 EU MEMBER STATES: KEY FINDINGS 45 1. ACCESS TO THE TERRITORY AND TO THE PROCEDURE 45 From Mare Nostrum to Push-backs in the Aegean: the different faces of external border controls 45 Delays in registering asylum claims 47 2. SAFE COUNTRY CONCEPTS 48 Procedural consequences of designating a country as a safe country of origin 50 The use of the safe country of origin concept in practice 51 No place for national lists of safe countries in a common policy on asylum? 52 3. SUBSEQUENT APPLICATIONS 53 Personal interviews 54 Obstacles to lodge a subsequent asylum application 54 4. ACCESS TO AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AND FREE LEGAL ASSISTANCE 56 4.1 Access to free legal assistance and representation 57 Access to free legal assistance at the first instance of the regular procedure 57 Access to free legal assistance at the appeal stage of the regular procedure 58 Budget cuts in legal aid 58 4.2 Right to an effective remedy 59 Access to an effective remedy during the regular procedure 59 Access to an effective remedy in special procedures and Dublin procedures 61 5. MATERIAL RECEPTION CONDITIONS 63 Restrictions to free movement of asylum seekers on the territory and dispersal schemes 63 Reception capacity 64 Conditions in reception facilities 65 6. DETENTION 66 Grounds for detention 67 Detention conditions 70 Detention of children 72 7. ASYLUM SEEKERS WITH SPECIAL PROCEDURAL AND RECEPTION NEEDS 74 1. Mechanisms to identify persons in need of special procedural guarantees and special reception needs 75 2. Unaccompanied children 77 Age assessment 77 Guardianship and legal representation of unaccompanied children 78 CONCLUSION 83 ANNEX I - STATISTICAL TABLES 89 ANNEX II - MAIN CHANGES SINCE THE PREVIOUS REPORT UPDATE IN 14 MEMBER STATES 97 Austria 99 Belgium 100 Bulgaria 100 France 102 Germany 104 Greece 104 Hungary 105 Ireland 106 Italy 107 Malta 108 Netherlands 109 Poland 110 Sweden 111 United Kingdom 111 ANNEX III – SELECTED ASYLUM-RELATED CASE-LAW OF THE ECTHR AND THE CJEU 113 The AIDA project The Asylum Information Database (AIDA) is a project of the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE), in partnership with Forum Refugiés-Cosi, the Hungarian Helsinki Committee and the Irish Refugee Council. The overall goal of the project is to contribute to the improvement of asylum policies and practices in Europe and the situation of asylum seekers by providing all relevant actors with appropriate tools and information to support their advocacy and litigation efforts, both at the national and European level. The project aims to do so by providing independent and up-to date information to the media, researchers, advocates, legal practitioners and the public on asylum practices in Europe, in particular with regard to asylum procedures, reception conditions and detention. The database features analysis of the respective national asylum systems from the perspective of non-governmental organisations that assist asylum seekers and per- sons granted international protection, while giving a voice to those who arrive in Europe fleeing persecution, conflict and other serious human rights violations. During the project’s first phase (September 2012- December 2013), information on asylum procedures, re- ception conditions and detention was gathered in 14 Member states Austria, Belgium Bulgaria, Germany, France, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden and the United Kingdom). It led to the publication of 14 country reports in July 2013, which were updated in November- December 2013; of comparative indicators for those 14 countries, as well as relevant news and advocacy resources. In addition, in September 2013, an Annual Report was issued. During the second phase of the project (January 2014 – December 2015), the database is being extended to include two additional EU Member States (Cyprus and Croatia) as well as two non-EU neighbouring countries (Switzerland and Turkey). The existing 14 country reports as well as the comparative indicators are still regu- larly updated (latest update published in Spring 2014).1 The report on Cyprus was published in August 2014 and the report on Croatia is to be published in September 2014. The AIDA project is funded by EPIM (the European Programme on Integration and Migration), an initiative of the Network of European Foundations and by the Adessium Foundation. Additional research for the second update of 14 national reports (AT, BE, BG, DE, FR, GR, HU, IE, IT, MT, NL, PL, SE, UK), published in the Spring of 2014, was made possible thanks to financial support from the Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Programme of the European Union (FRAME Project). 2 The contents of the database are the sole responsibility of ECRE and the national experts and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Commission, EPIM or Adessium Foundation. 1. The second update of the Swedish report was not finalised at the time of writing this annual report. Therefore information with regard to Sweden is up-to-date as of February 2014. However, changes in the asylum practice in Sweden since that date were minimal. 2. The FRAME project aims to promote the principles laid down in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union amongst legal practitioners protecting the rights of vulnerable migrants. It also aims to strengthen co-operation and the exchange of information between asylum and migration lawyers and general EU law practitioners with a specific focus on litigating before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).The project is coordinated by ECRE in partnership with the Dutch Council for Refugees and the Romanian Refugee Council. Introduction The arrival of persons fleeing persecution, conflicts and human rights abuses at the southern shores of the European Union (EU) has dominated much of the debate in Europe on asylum in the past year. The images of the thousands of men, women and children arriving on boats in Italy, Malta and the Greek islands as well as the reports about those who died on their way to Europe have sadly become all too familiar. While the boat arrivals continue to make the headlines in the European press and the numbers of persons arriving by sea in Italy reach unprecedented levels, a true European response is lacking. Certainly, the death of over 360 migrants, asylum seekers and refugees off the coast of Lampedusa in October 2013 created a shockwave across Europe. European leaders were quick to deplore the loss of lives and made solemn pledges that all should and would be done to prevent this from happening again.