Spain – Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court, 6 October 2016, Appeal No 808/2016
Keywords:
| Keywords |
|
Exclusion from protection
Description
Exclusion from being a refugee on any of the grounds set out in Article 12 of the Qualification Directive or exclusion from being eligible for subsidiary protection on any of the grounds set out in Article 17 of the Qualification Directive. |
|
Non-refoulement
Description
A core principle of international Refugee Law that prohibits States from returning refugees in any manner whatsoever to countries or territories in which their lives or freedom may be threatened. Note: The principle of non-refoulement is a part of customary international law and is therefore binding on all States, whether or not they are parties to the Geneva Convention. |
|
Subsidiary Protection
Description
The protection given to a third-country national or a stateless person who does not qualify as a refugee but in respect of whom substantial grounds have been shown for believing that the person concerned, if returned to his or her country of origin, or in the case of a stateless person, to his or her country of former habitual residence, would face a real risk of suffering serious harm as defined in Article 15 of 2004/83/EC, and to whom Article 17(1) and (2) of 2004/83/EC do not apply, and is unable, or, owing to such risk, unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of that country.” “Note: The UK has opted into the Qualification Directive (2004/83/EC) but does not (legally) use the term Subsidiary Protection. It is believed that the inclusion of Humanitarian Protection within the UK Immigration rules fully transposes the Subsidiary Protection provisions of the Qualification Directive into UK law. |
|
Inadmissible application
Description
Member States may consider an application for asylum as inadmissible pursuant toArticle 25 of the Asylum Procedures Directive if: “(a) another Member State has granted refugee status; (b) a country which is not a Member State is considered as a first country of asylum for the applicant, pursuant to Article 26; (c) a country which is not a Member State is considered as a safe third country for the applicant, pursuant to Article 27; (d) the applicant is allowed to remain in the Member State concerned on some other grounds and as result of this he/she has been granted a status equivalent to the rights and benefits of the refugee status by virtue of Directive 2004/83/EC; (e) the applicant is allowed to remain in the territory of the Member State concerned on some other grounds which protect him/her against refoulement pending the outcome of a procedure for the determination of status pursuant to point (d); (f) the applicant has lodged an identical application after a final decision; (g) a dependant of the applicant lodges an application, after he/she has in accordance with Article 6(3) consented to have his/her case be part of an application made on his/her behalf, and there are no facts relating to the dependant’s situation, which justify a separate application.“ |
Headnote:
The Administrative Chamber of the Spanish Supreme Court decides on the inadmissibility of the appeal an applicant for international protection submitted of a judgement that denied him the right of asylum and subsidiary protection.
The Supreme Court concludes there is no legal reasoning to admit the appeal, because what the National Court concluded was well-founded.
Facts:
In 2013, the Subsecretary of Internal Affairs (‘Subsecretario de Interior’) rejected the applicant’s application for international protection. An appeal to this decision was made one year later, and the judgement confirmed the decision of the Internal Affairs’ Subsecretary.
The applicant then appeals against it before the National Court’s Administrative Chamber. In turn, this Court confirms the denial of the international protection. The National Court stated that in this case art. 12(b) from Law 12/2009 is applicable, a transposition from art. 17(1)(d) of Directive 2011/95. This article establishes a clause for denying subsidiary protection to individuals that are considered a danger to the community, where there is a final judgement against them for a serious crime
The applicant decides to appeal to the Supreme Court, demanding the annulment of the previous judgement, on the basis of a violation of art. 4, 10 and 37(b) of Law 12/2009, as well as Article 3 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Decision & reasoning:
The Supreme Court states firstly that this appeal has no grounds to be admitted, because no arguments have been submitted that might lead to think that the appealed judgement has to be annulled.
The Court, upon assessing the administrative procedure and the previous decisions, confirmed the denial of subsidiary protection to the applicant on the basis of art. 12(b) of the Law 12/2009. The Court reiterated that the denial of the subsidiary protection is linked to the exclusion of the applicant, which follows from his conviction by a final judgement for the commitment of a serious crime, and concluded that the applicant constitutes a risk to the society.
The Supreme Court recalled that, as stated in the National Court’s judgement, the non-admission of the application of subsidiary protection does not entail the direct return to the country of origin, so the application of the principle of non-refoulement is not automatic (art. 21 Directive 2011/95).
Having stated this, the Supreme Court decides to not admit the appeal, since in the appeal’s argumentation of the applicant there is no reasoned grounds on why the National’s Court judgement had to be annulled.
Outcome:
The Supreme Court decides to not admit the appeal, reasoning that it lacks legal grounds as it has not been written with sufficient and concrete reasoning. With that, it also confirms the previous decisions: the denial of the subsidiary protection.
Subsequent proceedings:
The Supreme Court is the last resort in the Spanish Judicial System, so no subsequent proceedings can be followed.
Observations/comments:
This summary was written by Laura Pastor Rodriguez, LLM Student at Gent University.
Relevant International and European Legislation:
Cited National Legislation:
| Cited National Legislation |
| of 30 October |
| Arts. 4 |
| 10 and 37(b) - Law 12/2009 |
| regulating the right of asylum and the subsidiary protection |
Other sources:
Art. 14 Universal Declaration of Human Rights