Netherlands - AJDCoS, 12 July 2007, 200703181/1
| Country of Decision: | Netherlands |
| Country of applicant: | Congo (DRC) |
| Court name: | Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State |
| Date of decision: | 12-07-2007 |
| Citation: | 200703181/1 |
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. |
|
Duty of applicant
Description
The duty imposed on an applicant for international protection by Article. 4(1) of the Qualification Directive to submit as soon as possible all elements needed to substantiate the application for international protection. |
|
Subsequent application
Description
Where a person who has applied for refugee status in a Member State makes further representations or a subsequent application in the same Member State. Member States may apply a specific procedure involving a preliminary examination where a decision has been taken on the previous application or where a previous application has been withdrawn or abandoned. As with all aspects of the procedures directive, the same provisions will apply to applicants for subsidiary protection where a single procedure applies to both applications for asylum and subsidiary protection. |
Headnote:
Under Art 4 of the Qualification Directive the applicant is obliged to substantiate his application. No obligation exists on the State, if the applicant failed to do so, to provide an expert who can establish the authenticity of the submitted documents.
Facts:
The applicant appealed against the judgment of the District Court of Almelo (27 April 2007, AWB 07/14734 and 07/14733).
This case concerned the second application for asylum from the applicant. The Secretary of State for Justice had rejected the application because no new facts and circumstances were submitted. The applicant had submitted documents other than those submitted in his first application but the authenticity of those documents had not been established.
Decision & reasoning:
The applicant complained that the District Court failed to recognise that the duty to cooperate under Art 4.1 of the Qualification Directive imposes a duty on the Secretary of State to involve the Minister of Foreign Affairs for further investigation, when the Royal Netherlands Marechaussee (Kmar) cannot determine the authenticity of a document.
The Council of State considered that there is no basis for the opinion that the duty to cooperate contained in Art 4.1 of the Qualification Directive goes further than requiring the state to enable the applicant to submit evidence in support of his application and to remedy any defects, after being notified of the assessment of the application, before a decision is taken on the application. The Council of State further considered that under Art 4 of the Qualification Directive the applicant is obliged to support his application. No obligation exists for the State, now that the applicant failed to do so, to provide an expert to determine the authenticity of the documents submitted.
Outcome:
The appeal was dismissed.
Subsequent proceedings:
The applicant appealed to the Council of State, this appeal was also dismissed.
Observations/comments:
The Royal Netherlands Marechaussee, abbreviated to Kmar (Koninklijke Marechaussee), is one of the four Services of the armed forces of the Netherlands. It is a gendarmerie force performing military police and civil police duties. One of the KMar tasks is the surveillance of external borders of the Schengen area.