Sweden - Migration Court of Appeal, 20 December 2013, UM 5693-13
| Country of Decision: | Sweden |
| Court name: | Administrative Court of Appeal in Stockholm, Migration Court of Appeal |
| Date of decision: | 20-12-2013 |
| Citation: | UM 5693-13 |
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. |
|
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. |
|
Refugee sur place
Description
In the EU context, a person granted refugee status based on international protection needs which arose sur place, i.e. on account of events which took place since they left their country of origin. In a global context, a person who is not a refugee when they leave their country of origin, but who becomes a refugee, that is, acquires a well-founded fear of persecution, at a later date. Synonym: Objective grounds for seeking asylum occurring after the applicant's departure from his/her country of origin Note: Refugees sur place may owe their fear of persecution to a coup d'état in their home country, or to the introduction or intensification of repressive or persecutory policies after their departure. A claim in this category may also be based on bona fide political activities, undertaken in the country of residence or refuge. |
|
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:
The Migration Court committed serious breaches of procedure in an asylum case (in which grounds arising sur place were cited), as the Court failed to respond to all requests, state its assessment of political activity sur place, or communicate important written documents.
Facts:
The Appellant, A, appealed against a judgment by the Migration Court to the Migration Court of Appeal, which granted leave to appeal and proceeded immediately to examine the case.
Decision & reasoning:
Firstly, the Migration Court of Appeal found that the Appellant, in the Migration Court, had adduced written evidence, in the form of articles and photographs, in support of his need for protection on the ground of political activities sur place. It then found that the Migration Court had not communicated the notice of appeal or additional observations to the Swedish Migration Board and its judgment neither cited the sur place grounds nor assessed whether they resulted in the Appellant needing international protection. This can be viewed as a serious procedural failure not remediable by the Migration Court of Appeal.
The Migration Court of Appeal then noted that the Appellant had requested without success that documents be translated, during both the Swedish Migration Board's and the Migration Court's procedures. The Migration Court of Appeal did not respond to the request for a translation before the case was ruled on, so the Appellant was not given the opportunity to arrange a translation himself or supplement the appeal with information about the content of the documents.
All in all, the Migration Court of Appeal concluded that the Migration Court's procedure was so deficient that the contested judgment had to be overturned and the case had to be returned to the Court for re-examination.
Outcome:
Appeal upheld.
Relevant International and European Legislation:
Cited Cases:
| Cited Cases |
| Sweden - MIG 2011:21 |