ASYLNYTT
Sponsrad av Fridh Advokatbyrå
ARKIV:
EU:s flykting- och gränspolitik
Allmänt om migration, statistik
Asylnytt - Arkiv
Asylutredning och rättsprocedur
Asylprocedur i andra länder och internationellt
Klipp från media
Länk till information från myndigheter och organisationer
- Arkiveringsdatum 220413:
- Europa/ Is the EU's asylum system ready to welcome Ukrainian refugees?
- Grekland/ Verkligheten bakom migrationsministerns "en strikt men rättvis" asylpolitik
- Arkiveringsdatum 211122:
- Finland/ Johanna Vanto mfl: Collectivized Discretion: Explanations for recognition rates
- Arkiveringsdatum 210921:
- Grekland/ Appeals committee rejects 'Safe Third Country' return of Afghan family
Arkiveringsdatum 220413:
European Data Journalism Network 22-04-04:
Europa/ Is the EU's asylum system ready to welcome Ukrainian refugees?
Ukrainian refugees now enter the EU under the aegis of the ultra-fast special protection system, but regular reception centres across the Union are piling up hundreds of thousands of applications and rejecting many. EU members states' asylum systems average more than 15 months of delay.
"The breakdown is brutal," says Virginia Álvarez, spokesperson for Amnesty International in Spain and immigration expert, of the asylum reception system in Europe, which is now preparing to receive millions of Ukrainian refugees. That breakdown can be translated into numbers: at the end of 2021, EU member states had almost 760,000 asylum applications pending resolution.
How much is that? Well, considering that in December they received just over 60,000 applications in total, it's quite a backlog. Those almost 760,000 pending files are equivalent to the number of applications made in the last 15 months. That same asylum system must now handle a good portion of the almost 4 million refugees who, according to United Nations data , have left Ukraine since the Russian invasion in February 2022.
"There has never been the slightest political will on the part of any European country to comply with its international obligations towards refugees," Álvarez says. Yet it is possible to distinguish between bad practices. Of the 758,920 pending asylum applications on 31 December of 2021, more than 500,000 were in just three countries: Germany (more than 264,000), France (more than 145,000) and Spain (more than 100,000). Those countries also receive the most applications. Even so, their backlogs in terms of time are considerable: an average of more than 19 months pending resolution in Germany, more than 17 months in Spain and almost 15 months in France.
Ireland, with a more than 29-month average delay, Cyprus, Malta and Finland all have worse bottlenecks. Greece, Luxembourg, Belgium and Sweden have shorter delays that are still over a year long.
(...)
Hela artikeln (Extern länk)
innehållVårt Europa blogg 22-04-09:
Grekland/ Verkligheten bakom migrationsministerns "en strikt men rättvis" asylpolitik
/Utdrag:/
På internationella kvinnodagen den 8 mars 2022 skickade 27 civilsamhällesorganisationer verksamma inom området asyl och migration i Grekland ett öppet brev till EU-kommissionären Ylva Johansson om att Grekland systematiskt inte följer EU:s Asylprocedursdirektiv när de nekas söka asyl med hänvisning till att de har vistats i säkert 3e land - Turkiet. Artikel 38(4) i direktivet rör när det tredje landet inte tillåter den sökande att komma in på sitt territorium. Då ska medlemsstaten följa direktivets grundprinciper och garantier och själv säkra att personen ges tillgång till asylproceduren och bedöms enligt sina skyddsskäl. Detta är enligt brevet också infört i grekisk lag.
(...)
Hela artikeln (Extern länk)
Se även:
Vårt Europa 22-04-10: En kanske behövlig kort bakgrund till dagens Grekland och människor på flykt (Extern länk)
Arkiveringsdatum 220215:
AYS 22-01-30:
Grekland/ Can I claim asylum in Greece?
For the past few months this has been a question increasingly asked to people on the ground by new arrivals. Why? Because if you manage to arrive to Greece by land through the Northern border with Turkey, or to the islands of Crete and Rhodes, then there are currently no guaranteed safe routes for registering your asylum claim.
From the end of November 2021, the Greek Government decided to halt the Skype system which for seven years had been the mainland process for registering an asylum claim. It was imperfect in many ways, often leading to long wait times of over a year just to get through, but removing the service without an adequate replacement is of course playing havoc with people's lives. The only exception applies if you can prove a vulnerability as understood under Greek law.
On the mainland two other options remain. You can hand yourself into a police station which could result in detention in a pre-removal departure centre (detention centre for people due to be deported), or prolonged police detention. In the north of Greece, interaction with the police could lead you to being violently pushed back across the border to Turkey. All of these scenarios have been experienced by people on the move in Greece and reported to people who work with them.
Or, you can go to the Reception and Identification Centre (RIC) in Fylakio which only has capacity for 282 people. Here they may turn you away or start a push back procedure before you even arrive, or it may be a stop during a pushback after the police have picked you up. Multiple reports of pushbacks recorded by the Border Violence Monitoring Network (BVMN) confirm that pushbacks have taken place from Fylakio.
(...)
Hela artikeln (Extern länk)
Arkiveringsdatum 211231:
Refugees.dk 21-12-06:
Danmark/ Juraeksperter: Syriske inddragelsessager bør gå om
Dagbladet Information har dokumenteret, at de 100 endelige afslag fra Flygtningenævnet er baseret på en manipuleret brug af kilder - ganske som Eritrea-rapporten i 2014
Siden 2019 er godt 850 sager angående syrere med asylstatus efter §7,3 fra hovedstaden Damaskus og omegn blevet revurderet. Der er indtil videre 100 af dem, som endeligt har mistet deres ret til at opholde sig i Danmark (læs mere i vores status fra oktober her). Dagbladet Information har brugt måneder på at dykke ned i disse afgørelser, og ikke mindst de kilder, der ligger til grund for Flygtningenævnets vurderinger. Læs Informations artikel her (kræver abonnement).
Selve formålet med at Folketinget i 2015 vedtog en særlig status for syriske flygtninge, som ikke var personligt forfulgt, var at sende dem tilbage, så snart krigshandlingerne stilnede lidt af. Derfor har Udlændingestyrelsen løbende fulgt udviklingen i Syrien, og da de første sager om inddragelse for syrere fra Damaskus var en realitet i 2019, gav den ansvarlige minister Mattias Tesfaye ordre til at få sat skub i de hundredvis af inddragelsessager.
(I denne artikel er gengivet flere uddrag fra Informations artikel samt journalist Rasmus Bøgeskov Larsens opdatering på Facebook)
Danmark er ikke længere et sikkert tredjeland
Andre lande i Europa har også givet opholdstilladelser til syrere af de samme grunde, og vurderer også situationen i Syrien løbende. Men det er kun Danmark, der er begyndt at inddrage opholdstilladelser, og i vores nabolande har de fleste syrere i dag opnået permanent ophold eller statsborgerskab.
(...)
Hela artikeln (Extern länk)
Refugees.dk 21-12-13: "Det giver ikke mening, at mine forældre skal bo i udrejsecenter!" (Extern länk)
Arkiveringsdatum 211122:
International Migration Review 21-11-04:
Finland/ Collectivized Discretion: Explanations for decreased asylum recognition rates
Johanna Vanto, Elsa Saarikkomäki, Anne Alvesalo-Kuusi
In 2015, during the so-called "refugee crisis" in Europe, Finland was among the European countries receiving exceptionally large numbers of asylum applications. As the volume of asylum applications surged, however, the percentage of positive asylum decisions in Finland declined substantially. In this article, we explore reasons for this dramatic drop in recognitions rates and examine Finnish immigration control authorities' use of discretion in asylum credibility assessment. Our approach is unique in its application of mixed methods to examine asylum decisions in pre- and post-crisis situations. We found that asylum caseworkers' inconsistent assessment of similar facts and lack of faith in the veracity of applicants' claims were essential to the mass denial of young Iraqi asylum applicants in Finland. This finding is important because it illustrates how asylum officers are able to "shift the border," or generate a shift in asylum decision-making on a grand scale, without meaningful changes in law. Asylum officers, we show, are able to bring about such a shift via what we call collectivized discretion, or large-scale use of discretion, in asylum status determinations to control migration. Prior research on discretion in asylum decision-making highlights the individual decision-maker. This article expands discretion research by offering new insights on large-scale, collective discretionary shifts in the application of asylum law. We conclude that it is crucial that asylum status determinations be anchored in the individual assessment of each applicant's case, as collectivized discretion can lead to arbitrary results in the application of asylum law, potentially forcing those in need of refugee protection to face deportation.
Hela artikeln (Extern länk)
Arkiveringsdatum 210921:
ECRE 21-09-10:
Grekland/ Appeals committee rejects 'Safe Third Country' return of Afghan family
An appeals committee has rejected the return of a vulnerable Afghan family, ruling that Turkey could not be considered a safe third country for them. Systematic violent pushbacks by Greek authorities continue as the parliament has approved legislation preventing NGO oversight.
A second instance decision of the Greek asylum procedure prevented the return of a extremely vulnerable Afghan family under the controversial Joint Ministerial Decision (JMD). The JMD deems Turkey a safe third country for the main refugee-producing countries of Afghanistan, Syria, Somalia, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. The appeals court took into consideration the particular vulnerability of the family and lack of access to support in Turkey. The family included an 83-year-old man with symptoms of dementia and hearing loss, and a 61-year old woman in a wheelchair, unable to speak or support herself and wearing a diaper. According to her 15-year old daughter, she had survived beatings by the Taliban, two strokes, and suffered from quadriplegia. Further, her father had been imprisoned for 18 months by the Taliban and was released only after paying a ransom. "While this cannot be interpreted as a direct challenge to the JMD, the decision is nonetheless significant as it upholds the obligation to individually assess every case, indicating that the JMD cannot be applied automatically", said ECRE Legal Officer Stavros Papageorgopoulos.
(...)
Hela artikeln (Extern länk)
Arkiveringsdatum 210616:
Scotus Blog 21-06-12:
USA/ Justices united against judge-made rules on asylum seekers' credibility
Eunice Lee
Last week in Garland v. Dai and Garland v. Alcaraz-Enriquez, the Supreme Court held that reviewing courts cannot treat an asylum seeker's testimony as credible unless the agency first finds the applicant credible. The unanimous opinion, penned by Justice Neil Gorsuch, rejected the contrary approach of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
In argument and briefing, the government contended that the 9th Circuit rule - which took asylum seekers' testimony as credible when faced with agency silence on credibility - violated standards of federal court review. The asylum seekers, meanwhile, argued that the rule properly flowed from the Chenery doctrine, which requires federal courts to review an agency's reasons as given rather than substituting their own rationales.
In asylum cases, the immigration judge is responsible for making credibility determinations as trier-of-fact. The statute that covers asylum applications - Section 1158 of Title 8 - specifies that "if no adverse credibility determination is explicitly made" by the immigration judge, "the applicant or witness shall have a rebuttable presumption of credibility on appeal" before the Board of Immigration Appeals. But the statute doesn't say what the federal courts should do if the BIA fails to expressly find the presumption rebutted.
In the cases of both Ming Dai and Cesar Alcaraz-Enriquez, the immigration judge didn't (explicitly) make a credibility finding, and the BIA didn't (explicitly) apply the presumption or deem it rebutted. Accordingly, the 9th Circuit treated the asylum seekers' testimony as credible when conducting its own review.
(...)
Hela artikeln (Extern länk)
Källor: Informationen på denna sida är hämtad från följande källor (externa länkar): EU (kommissionen, ministerrådet, parlamentet och domstolen), Europarådet (mr-kommissionären, domstolen, kommittén mot tortyr), FN:s flyktingkommissariat UNHCR, FN:s kommitté mot tortyr m.fl. FN-organ, Sveriges Radio, SvT, andra svenska media via Nyhetsfilter och pressmeddelanden via Newsdesk, utländska media till exempel via Are You Syrious och Rights in Exile, internationella organisationer som Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, ECRE, Statewatch och Picum, organisationer i Sverige som Rädda Barnen, Asylrättscentrum, Svenska Amnesty, FARR och #vistårinteut samt myndigheter och politiska organ som Migrationsverket, Sveriges domstolar, JO, Justitiedepartementet m.fl. departement och Sveriges Riksdag.
Bevakning: Hjalte Lagercrantz och Sanna Vestin. Sammanställning: Sanna Vestin. Asylnytt är ett ideellt projekt. Sponsring avser prenumerationsavgifter. Tips emottages tacksamt.