Hungary - Budapest Administrative and Labour Court, 7 March 2013, A.A.A. v. Office of Immigration and Nationality, 6.K.30.092/2013/12
Keywords:
| Keywords |
|
Country of origin information
Description
"Information used by the Member States authorities to analyse the socio-political situation in countries of origin of applicants for international protection (and, where necessary, in countries through which they have transited) in the assessment, carried out on an individual basis, of an application for international protection.” It includes all relevant facts as they relate to the country of origin at the time of taking a decision on the application, obtained from various sources, including the laws and regulations of the country of origin and the manner in which they are applied, regulations of the country of origin, plus general public sources, such as reports from (inter)national organisations, governmental and non-governmental organisations, media, bi-lateral contacts in countries of origin, embassy reports, etc. This information is also used inter alia for taking decisions on other migration issues, e.g. on return, as well as by researchers. One of the stated aims of the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) is to progressively bring all activities related to practical cooperation on asylum under its roof, to include the collection of Country of Origin Information and a common approach to its use. |
|
Stateless person
Description
Person who is not considered as a national by any State under the operation of its law. This includes also a person whose nationality is not established. |
|
Well-founded fear
Description
One of the central elements of the refugee definition under Article 1A ofthe1951 Refugee Convention is a “well-founded fear of persecution”: "Since fear is subjective, the definition involves a subjective element in the person applying for recognition as a refugee. Determination of refugee status will therefore primarily require an evaluation of the applicant's statements rather than a judgement on the situation prevailing in his country of origin. To the element of fear--a state of mind and a subjective condition--is added the qualification ‘well-founded’. This implies that it is not only the frame of mind of the person concerned that determines his refugee status, but that this frame of mind must be supported by an objective situation. The term ‘well-founded fear’ therefore contains a subjective and an objective element, and in determining whether well-founded fear exists, both elements must be taken into consideration." |
|
Refugee Status
Description
The recognition by a Member State of a third-country national or stateless person as a refugee. |
Headnote:
Applicant of Palestinian origin received refugee status. Assistance from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) ceased for reasons beyond the applicant’s control, and therefore the applicant is entitled ipso facto to the benefits provided by the Convention.
Facts:
The applicant of Palestinian origin, living in a refugee camp in Lebanon, left Lebanon and applied for asylum in Hungary because he submitted that his personal safety was at serious risk in the camp due to regular armed clashes, bombings and threats from armed groups.
Decision & reasoning:
The Office of Immigration and Nationality (BÁH) rejected the application, stating that while Palestinians living in Lebanon are exposed to discrimination in all areas of life, this applies to all Palestinians in Lebanon, not just to the applicant. Consequently, the applicant was not exposed to persecution for a reason outlined in the Geneva Convention. When interpreting Article 1D of the Geneva Convention the court considered the judgment reached by the European Court of Justice in the El Kott case as determinative. On this basis it examined whether the applicant did in fact request UNRWA assistance, whether such assistance had ceased, and whether there were any grounds for exclusion.
The court found that the applicant was a Palestinian refugee registered by UNRWA, who was forced to leave the agency’s area of operations because his personal safety was at serious risk following a series of physical and psychological attacks. UNRWA was unable to protect the applicant, and therefore the applicant is entitled ipso facto to the benefits provided by the Geneva Convention, and he was recognised as a refugee.
Outcome:
The court recognised the applicant as a refugee.
Observations/comments:
The UNHCR last issued an opinion in the El Kott case on Article 1D of the Geneva Convention and Article 12(1)(a) of the Qualification Directive with regard to Palestinian refugees in October 2011.
UNHCR Observations in the case C-364/11 El Kott and Others regarding the interpretation of Article 1D of the 1951 Convention and Article 12(1)(a) of the Qualification Directive, 27 October 2011, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4eaa95d92.html [accessed 29 April 2013]
and:
UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Revised Note on the Applicability of Article 1D of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees to Palestinian Refugees, October 2009, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4add77d42.html [accessed 29 April 2013]
Relevant International and European Legislation:
Cited National Legislation:
Cited Cases:
| Cited Cases |
| CJEU - C-364/11 Mostafa Abed El Karem El Kott, Chadi Amin A Radi, Hazem Kamel Ismail v Bevandorlasi es Allampolgarsagi Hivatal (BAH) |
Other sources:
UNHCR statement on the Applicability of Article 1D of the Geneva Convention and Article 12 (a) a) of the Qualification Directive in the Bolbol case (October 2009):
UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Revised Note on the Applicability of Article 1D of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees to Palestinian Refugees, October 2009