Netherlands - District Court Utrecht, 12 April 2011, AWB 10/43531
| Country of Decision: | Netherlands |
| Country of applicant: | Iraq |
| Court name: | District Court Utrecht |
| Date of decision: | 12-04-2011 |
| Citation: | AWB 10/43531 |
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. |
|
Relevant Documentation
Description
“All documentation at the applicants disposal regarding the applicant's age, background, including that of relevant relatives, identity, nationality(ies), country(ies) and place(s) of previous residence, previous asylum applications, travel routes, identity and travel documents and the reasons for applying for international protection.” |
Headnote:
To not give the applicant some additional time to submit documents that the authorities are already aware of which may be relevant for the asylum application is a violation of Art 4.1 of the Qualification Directive.
Facts:
The applicant claimed to have been attacked by his girlfriend’s brother and to have been injured because of this attack. He claimed to have been attacked on a subsequent occasion as well and reported this to the police.
The applicant wanted to submit documents in support of his claim. These documents included his identity card, hospital and police documents. However, these were taken by the travel agent. It was not in disputed that the applicant’s travel agent took his documents.
His application for refugee status was rejected on credibility grounds. The applicant claimed that this decision must be quashed because he was not granted some additional time to get new copies of these documents and relied on Art 4.1 of the Qualification Directive.
Decision & reasoning:
The district court held that the applicant did not provide any documents with his application. The district court further held that the respondent believes the applicant’s claim that his identity card, telephone, hospital documents and police documents were taken from him by force. They further confirmed that the applicant had already declared at the first hearing that he contacted his brother by telephone to send the documents . He also declared that these documents help to confirm his asylum account.
The court concluded:
‘’that respondent, to acknowledge on the one hand that the applicant’s documents were taken from him by force by the travel agent, but on the other hand not to grant him a reasonable period to gather copies of these documents so that he could submit these to confirm his asylum account, while it was clear that he made a genuine effort to get these documents available as soon as possible, is in the light of Art 4 of the Qualification Directive and the respondent’s policy, a violation of the principle of due care. There is no reason why the respondent in this case, given the specific circumstances, failed to wait for these documents, of which faxed copies were provided and the originals were on their way, and take these into account when making a decision on the asylum claim. The court holds that it was not possible to say in advance that these documents, in particular the police report and the medical document, were irrelevant for the assessment of the credibility of the asylum account.’’
Outcome:
The applicant’s appeal was allowed.