National law / Refugee / Asylum law

The case concerned the removal from Switzerland to Afghanistan of an Afghan national of Hazara ethnicity who was a Muslim convert to Christianity. The European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there would be: a violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights in the event of the applicant’s return to Afghanistan.

5 November 2019 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Refugee / Asylum law - Religious persecution (including forced conversion) | Countries: Afghanistan - Switzerland

November 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Comments on National Legislation

A person with foreign nationality entered the Mexican State by air, having only 180 days that are granted to any foreign person to be in Mexico. The complainant requested the recognition of her refugee status. The Director of Protection and Return of the Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance (COMAR) asked her the reasons why it was physically impossible for her to request refugee recognition within 30 days after entering Mexico, to which she replied that she was not aware, therefore, the request was denied. The Second Chamber, when carrying out an analysis of article 19 of the Regulation of the Law on Refugees and Complementary Protection, held that it was proven to be in the exceptional case provided for in the aforementioned paragraph and, therefore, the agreement in which the claim was denied is illegal. This is so, given the reasons provided by the applicant for which she was unable to submit her application for recognition in a timely manner, for which reason it had to be admitted for processing.

23 October 2019 | Judicial Body: Mexico: Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Refugee / Asylum law | Countries: Mexico

A person with foreign nationality entered the Mexican State by air, having only 180 days that are granted to any foreign person to be in Mexico. The complainant requested the recognition of her refugee status. The Director of Protection and Return of the Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance (COMAR) requested the reasons why it was materially impossible for her to request refugee recognition within 30 days after entering Mexico, to which she replied that she was unaware, therefore, the request was denied. The Second Chamber, when conducting an analysis of Article 19 of the Regulations of the Law on Refugees and Complementary Protection, held that the agreement in which the admission of the application for recognition of refugee status presented was illegal, is illegal. This is so, given the reasons given by the applicant for which she was unable to submit her application for recognition in a timely manner, for which reason it had to be admitted for processing.

23 October 2019 | Judicial Body: Mexico: Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Refugee / Asylum law | Countries: Mexico

An individual entered the national territory, leaving his country of origin due to the conditions of persecution, insecurity, and human rights violations. By means of a document submitted to the Mexican Commission for Aid to Refugees, he requested recognition of his refugee status, however, it was denied. The Second Chamber considered that in accordance with an interpretation of numeral 19 of the Regulation of the Law on Refugees and Complementary Protection, the state of vulnerability in which the refugee applicants are in Mexico must be considered, therefore the accreditation to present the request outside the period established by law should not be strict or rigorous, as it would not be valid for them to be required to prove the inability they had to submit their application in time. Failure to submit the application within a specific period should not automatically lead to the rejection of the respective application, but rather consider those cases in which the submission outside the legal deadline was due to justified reasons. Therefore, it was decided to protect two applicants for recognition of refugee status, against the refusal of the authorities responsible for admitting their applications because they did not prove a cause beyond their control that prevented them from submitting said request within the legal term.

16 October 2019 | Judicial Body: Mexico: Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Refugee / Asylum law | Countries: Mexico

An individual entered the national territory, leaving his country of origin, due to the conditions of persecution, insecurity, and human rights violations. By means of a document submitted to the Mexican Commission for Aid to Refugees, the individual requested recognition of his refugee status, however, it was denied. The Second Chamber considered that in accordance with an interpretation of numeral 19 of the Regulation of the Law on Refugees and Complementary Protection, the state of vulnerability in which the refugee applicants are in Mexico must be considered, therefore the accreditation to present the request outside the period established by law should not be strict or rigorous, as it would not be valid for them to be required to prove the inability they had to submit their application in time. Failure to submit the application within a specific period should not automatically lead to the rejection of the respective application, but rather consider those cases in which the submission outside the legal deadline was due to justified reasons. Therefore, it was decided to protect two applicants for recognition of refugee status, against the refusal of the authorities responsible for admitting their applications because they did not prove a cause beyond their control that prevented them from submitting said request within the legal term.

16 October 2019 | Judicial Body: Mexico: Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Refugee / Asylum law | Countries: Mexico

October 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Comments on National Legislation

30 September 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Comments on National Legislation

Leading case concerning family reunification and safe third country: The appellant was recognized as refugee in Italy on 16 November 2009 He went to Switzerland for family reunification. The fact that a person has already been granted protection as a refugee and asylum in another Dublin State constitutes a "special circumstance" within the meaning of Art. 51 para. 1 of the Swiss Asylum Law which precludes the granting of family asylum.

25 September 2019 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Family reunification - Refugee / Asylum law - Safe third country | Countries: Eritrea - Switzerland

September 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: General Comments/Recommendations