Persons of concern
- Asylum-seekers 4,456
- Internally displaced persons (IDPs) 10,045
- Persons not in need of international protection 123
- Persons of concern to UNHCR 400
- Refugee seamen 315
- Refugees 12,101
- Refugees sur place 48
- Returnees 1,785
- Urban refugees 209
|
UNHCR Position on Returns to Sudan
May 2023 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country/Situation Specific Position Papers |
|
UNHCR Observations on the draft proposal "Certain stricter conditions for family immigration and limited possibilities for residence permit due to humanitarian reasons"
[Utkast till lagrådsremiss: Vissa skärpta villkor för anhöriginvandring och begränsade möjligheter till uppehållstillstånd av humanitära skäl]
28 March 2023 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Comments on National Legislation |
|
UNHCR Thematic Update: Law of Ukraine on Compensation for Destroyed and Damaged Property, and the State Registry of Damaged and Destroyed Property
March 2023 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Comments on National Legislation |
|
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Statement on the interpretation of Article 5(3) of the EU Qualification Directive regarding subsequent applications for international protection based on sur place religious conversion
3 February 2023 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae |
|
International Protection Considerations with Regard to People Fleeing Nicaragua
January 2023 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country/Situation Specific Position Papers |
|
EMAP (Gang violence – Convention Reason) El Salvador CG v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] UKUT 00335 (IAC)
The main determination in this case is whether harm amounts to persecution for one of the five reasons set out in the Refugee Convention. The Court considered country background of El-Salvador to assess and determine if the appellant has a well-founded fear/risk of persecution for reasons relating to membership of a particular social group and different political opinion. 15 December 2022 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Acts of persecution - Asylum-seekers - EU Qualification Directive - Gang related violence | Countries: El Salvador - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland |
|
UNHCR Position on Returns to North Kivu, South Kivu, Ituri and Adjacent Areas in the Democratic Republic of Congo Affected by Ongoing Conflict and Violence – Update III
November 2022 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country/Situation Specific Position Papers |
|
GM v Országos Idegenrendézeti Főigazgatóság,
Alkotmányvédelmi Hivatal, Terrorelhárítási Központ, REQUEST for a preliminary ruling, Case C‑159/21
1. Article 23(1) of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection, read in conjunction with Article 45(4) of that directive and in the light of the general principle of EU law relating to the right to sound administration and of Article 47 of the Charter, must be interpreted as: precluding national legislation which provides that, where a decision rejecting an application for international protection or withdrawing such protection is based on information the disclosure of which would jeopardise the national security of the Member State in question, the person concerned or his or her legal adviser can access that information only after obtaining authorisation to that end, are not provided even with the substance of the grounds on which such decisions are based and cannot, in any event, use, for the purposes of administrative procedures or judicial proceedings, the information to which they may have had access. 2. Article 4(1) and (2), Article 10(2) and (3), Article 11(2) and Article 45(3) of Directive 2013/32, read in conjunction with Article 14(4)(a) and Article 17(1)(d) of Directive 2011/95/EU of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted, must be interpreted as: precluding national legislation under which the determining authority is systematically required, where bodies entrusted with specialist functions linked to national security have found, by way of a non-reasoned opinion, that a person constituted a danger to that security, to refuse to grant that person subsidiary protection, or to withdraw international protection previously granted to that person, on the basis of that opinion. 3. Article 17(1)(b) of Directive 2011/95 must be interpreted as: not precluding an applicant from being excluded from being eligible for subsidiary protection, pursuant to that provision, on the basis of a criminal conviction of which the competent authorities were already aware when they granted to that applicant, at the end of a previous procedure, refugee status which was subsequently withdrawn. 22 September 2022 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 2011 Recast Qualification Directive (EU) | Topic(s): Asylum-seekers - Exclusion clauses - International protection - National security / Public order - Statelessness | Countries: Hungary |
|
International Protection Considerations with Regard to People Fleeing Somalia
September 2022 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country/Situation Specific Position Papers |
|
Good Practices Paper - Action 1: Resolving Existing Major Situations of Statelessness
16 August 2022 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports |
