Czech Republic - Supreme Administrative Court, 25 October 2011, A.M. v. Ministry of Interior, 9 Azs 17/2011-91

Facts:

The applicant was a minor, who was born in the Czech Republic and whose parents, Syrian Kurds, applied for international protection on his behalf after his birth. The minor applicant applied for asylum on the same grounds as his parents. It was also argued that the applican's mother was stateless and thus the applicant was without citizenship and would face inhuman treatment in Syria.

The Ministry of Interior (MOI) rejected the minor’s application. The rejection was linked to the fact that no grounds were found to exist for granting protection to the applicant’s parents in several previous proceedings.

This decision was appealed to Regional Court, which upheld the MOI’s findings on the issue of asylum. However, on the matter of subsidiary protection the decision of the MOI was cancelled (due to the situation in Syria in 2011).

The minor (represented by his parents) appealed against the rejection of the asylum part of the judgment to the Supreme Administrative Court. It was argued that the minor’s application should not be fully associated with the fate of his parents’ application. The applicant argued that he feared persecution as he belonged to the Kurdish minority.

Decision & reasoning:

The Court confirmed that in the case of minor applicants for international protection the situation of their parents, and also of the individual minor, and possibly the different situation of the minor (if such exists i.e. colour of skin), must be taken  into account. However, in this case, the applicant claimed international protection shortly after his birth in the Czech Republic. In his application his parents stated the very same reasons as were contained in their applications. His mother particularly highlighted the fact that they belonged to the Kurdish minority and that she did not have citizenship of Syria. It was therefore logical, according to the Court, that in this case the MOI and the Regional Court, derived their decision on the applicant’s asylum claim from the previously rejected applications of his parents. In their case, in several proceedings, it was found that there were no reasons to grant asylum. The sole fact that one belongs to the Kurdish minority in Syria does not constitute grounds for granting asylum.

Outcome:

The appeal was dismissed.