Belgium – Council of State, 21 October 2009, Nr. 187.209

 

The Council of State then found that the fact that an exhibit is new or was obtained after an earlier asylum procedure was determined, did not mean that it contained new elements in the sense of Art 51/8 of the Belgian Aliens Law. New elements should relate to facts or situations that occurred after the last phase of the procedure in which the applicant could have produced them. By indicating that the new exhibit was meant to prove elements that were uncertain in her first application, the applicant admitted that the newly produced elements were unrelated to facts or situations that occurred after the rejection of her first asylum application. The Council of State concluded that:

 

“an exhibit that is only meant to prove facts and situations relied on in the first application and/or refute grounds of refusal of the first asylum application, is not a new element in the sense of Art 51/8, Belgian Aliens Law.”

 

 

“The Minister or his/her mandate holder can decide not to take into consideration an asylum application when the foreign national has previously filed the same application (…), and he/she does not present new elements that there exist, in his/her respect, serious indications of a well-founded fear of persecution (…), or serious indications of a real risk of serious harm (…). The new elements should relate to facts or situations that have occurred after the last phase in the procedure in which the applicant would have been able to present them.”