Law Library of Congress Comparative Report on Asylum Application Laws
The Law Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. recently published its research report on the asylum application processes in nine selected jurisdictions.
The report looks at policies in Canada, Germany, Italy, Malta, Portugal, Sweden, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the European Union:
"In March 2022, the EU+ countries, meaning the EU Member States plus Switzerland and Norway, received a total of 82,900 asylum applications—the most since 2016 according to the European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA). The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) reported a similar worldwide trend. In the first months of 2022, more than 100 million people were displaced, including 4.4 million asylum seekers. The number of forcibly displaced people constitutes the highest ever on record. Turkey reportedly hosts the world’s largest population of refugees."
"People seeking asylum must prove to the competent authorities that they have a well-founded fear of being persecuted. At what point in the asylum application process this requirement is examined varies from country to country. In Canada, it is not required for a referral for a hearing at the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board. The EU has enacted the Asylum Procedures Directive, which establishes common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection, meaning refugee status and subsidiary protection. Applicants are required to cooperate with the competent authorities and are entitled to a personal interview to determine their eligibility. The EU Member States surveyed in this report, meaning Germany, Italy, Malta, Portugal, and Sweden, are obligated to transpose the EU directive into their national laws and comply with its requirements. Even though the UK withdrew from the EU on January 31, 2020, it has transposed a number of EU directives, including the Asylum Procedures Directive, into its national legislation. Likewise, Turkey’s laws are largely in line with the EU laws, with the notable exception of the 'temporary protection' status."
Labels: comparative and foreign law, refugees