Czech Republic - Supreme Administrative Court, 16 June 2007, A.S. v Ministry of Interior, 6 Azs 165/2006-113
| Country of Decision: | Czech Republic |
| Country of applicant: | Ukraine |
| Court name: | Supreme Administrative Court |
| Date of decision: | 16-06-2007 |
| Citation: | 6 Azs 165/2006-113 |
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. |
|
Procedural guarantees
Description
“In the interests of a correct recognition of those persons in need of protection … every applicant should, subject to certain exceptions, have an effective access to procedures, the opportunity to cooperate and properly communicate with the competent authorities so as to present the relevant facts of his/her case and sufficient procedural guarantees to pursue his/her case throughout all stages of the procedure.” Procedures should satisfy certain basic requirements, which reflect the special situation of the applicant for refugee status, and which would ensure that the applicant is provided with certain essential guarantees. Some of these basic requirements are set out in on p.31 of the UNHCR Handbook as well as the APD Arts. 10, 17 and 34 and include: a personal interview, the right to legal assistance and representation, specific guarantees for vulnerable persons and regarding the examination procedure, and those guarantees set out in the Asylum Procedures Directive. |
Headnote:
The asylum procedure is a specific procedure as the applicants do not have knowledge of the Czech language. If an applicant submits documents in a language other than Czech it must be considered if it is the applicant or the Ministry of Interior who is responsible for providing a translation.
Facts:
The applicant, a citizen of the Ukraine, applied for asylum in Czech Republic because he did not perform armed service in the Ukraine and therefore feared being imprisoned on return. The Ministry of Interior (MOI) denied his asylum request on the grounds that the applicant only applied for asylum to legalise his stay in the Czech Republic.The applicant appealed to a Regional Court, which fully agreed with the decision of the Ministry of Interior. In its decision the Regional Court also referred to the previous Court´s case law, according to which the fact that the applicant refused to perform the obligatory armed service in his country, could not, by itself, be considered as grounds for granting asylum.
The Regional Court further stated that as evidence, the applicant submitted to the Court an Amnesty International report in English and a letter from his mother in Russian, requiring the translation into Czech. According to the Regional Court, it was not its duty to translate documents, submitted by the applicants in foreign languages, into Czech. Therefore these documents were not translated.
Decision & reasoning:
The Supreme Administrative Court identified procedural defects in the Regional Court’s decision caused by the failure to translate evidence submitted by the applicant.
According to the Court, the legal opinion of the Regional Court that it is not obliged to translate documents submitted by the applicants in foreign languages into Czech, does not take into account the specificity of the asylum procedure. In this procedure, the applicant does not speak Czech or even have knowledge of Czech law and therefore it is the obligation of the Court to ensure that the applicant is not in weaker position then the Ministry of Interior.
Therefore, when dealing with evidence submitted in an asylum procedure in a foreign language, the Court cannot refuse to admit this evidence, just because the evidence is not in Czech. The Court should take into account the applicant’s financial circumstances and it should be considered if the applicant is able to translate the evidence into Czech. Otherwise the Court should provide the translation of the suggested evidence itself.
Outcome:
The appeal was successful and the Regional Court decision cancelled.
Observations/comments:
Decision of the Supreme Administrative Court n. 6 Azs 165/2006-113 available at www.nssoud.cz
Relevant International and European Legislation:
Cited National Legislation:
Cited Cases:
| Cited Cases |
| ECtHR - Kuopila v Finland (Application no. 27752/95) |
| Czech Republic - 1 Azs 13/2006-39 (Supreme Administrative Court) |
| Czech Republic - 5 Afs 147/2004 (Supreme Administrative Court) |
| Czech Republic - III ÚS 61/94 (Constitutional Court) |