Czech Republic - Supreme Administrative Court, 28 February 2007, T.A. v Ministry of Interior, 4 Azs 146/2006-100
| Country of Decision: | Czech Republic |
| Country of applicant: | Unknown |
| Court name: | Supreme Administrative Court |
| Date of decision: | 28-02-2007 |
| Citation: | 4 Azs 146/2006-100 |
Keywords:
| Keywords |
|
Assessment of facts and circumstances
Description
The duty of the state to carry out an individual assessment of all relevant elements of the asylum application according to the provisions of Article 4 of the Qualification Directive, including considering past persecution and credibility; and the duty of the applicant to submit as soon as possible all statements and documentation necessary to substantiate the application. |
|
Actors of protection
Description
"Actors such as: (a) the State; or (b) parties or organisations, including international organisations, controlling the State or a substantial part of the territory of the State; who take reasonable steps to prevent the persecution or suffering of serious harm, inter alia, by operating an effective legal system for the detection, prosecution and punishment of acts constituting persecution or serious harm, and the applicant has access to such protection." |
|
Actor of persecution or serious harm
Description
Per Art. 6 QD actors who subject an individual to acts of serious harm (as defined in Art. 15). Actors of persecution or serious harm include: (a) the State; (b) parties or organisations controlling the State or a substantial part of the territory of the State; (c) non-State actors, if it can be demonstrated that the actors mentioned in (a) and (b), including international organisations, are unable or unwilling to provide protection against persecution or serious harm as defined in Article 7. |
Headnote:
Where reports from applicant’s country of origin establish that the minority group to which the applicant belongs is a target of discrimination and persecution from the authorities and police, the applicant’s claim cannot be refused on the grounds that he/she had not asked the authorities for protection and failed to exhaust all legal means available.
Facts:
The applicant submitted an application for international protection in the Czech Republic. She stated that she was raped in her country of origin and that she was unable to cope with the rape and to continue living there. According to her statements, she was also discriminated against and oppressed because of her nationality. The Ministry of Interior (MOI) found that the applicant did not meet the conditions for granting international protection, mainly as she had not requested protection from her country of origin and had not exhausted all the legal means that were available to her. The applicant took an action against this decision, in which she stressed that the MOI had not considered the situation of the minority that she belonged to in her country of origin.
The country of origin information on the situation of the applicant's minority provided evidence for the applicant’s claims concerning discrimination, however the Ministry of Interior did not consider this. The applicant claimed that a logical connection between the information submitted by her and its consideration by the Ministry of Interior was missing. The Ministry of Interior had also failed to consider that the applicant was threatened by police officers. The applicant stressed that the relatives of the policemen who had raped her, were acting in this manner because they had knowledge of the state's support for such discrimination and human rights violations.
The Regional Court dismissed the action taken by the applicant, inter alia, as it did not consider the conduct of the private individuals as persecution, because it could not be concluded that the authorities had tolerated such behavior, when the applicant and her mother did not report the incidents to the authorities. The applicant appealed to Supreme Administrative Court.
Decision & reasoning:
The Court held that the Ministry of Interior is obliged to take into account the nature of the applicant’s country of origin, the way in which state power is exercised, the possibility of exercising political rights and other circumstances, which are relevant to establishing an asylum claim. For example, if it is know that the country of origin has a bad human rights record, that citizens are denied the right to change their government, that unlawful executions and disappearance take place, that torture is frequently used and that minorities are oppressed etc. then the Ministry of Interior must take this information into account in favor of the applicant.
The Supreme Administrative Court also ruled that where country of origin reports prove that the minority to which the applicant belongs, is a target of discrimination and persecution from the authorities and the police, the fact that the applicant did not asked the authorities for protection in his or her country of origin and failed to exhaust all legal means, cannot be a reason for not granting asylum.
Outcome:
The decision of the Regional Court was cancelled.
Observations/comments:
Decision of the SAC n. 4 Azs 146/2006-100, available at www.nssoud.cz