The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled that member states must provide migrants with the common information leaflet regarding asylum procedures and must conduct a personal interview, both in case of a first asylum application and in the event of a subsequent one filed in another EU Member State.
On Thursday, November 30, the Court of Justice emphasized that "the provision of the common leaflet and the conduct of a personal interview are required both upon a first asylum application and upon a subsequent application."
This directive ensures that applicants are put in a position to be able to inform authorities in the second member state about any factors preventing their transfer and justifying the latter member state's responsibility for examining their asylum application.
The issue is relevant -- a failure to comply with those obligations "may, under certain conditions, justify the annulment of the transfer decision", the court explained in a note issued on November 30.
Precedents motivating Court's opinion
The Court's opinion followed a request for clarification made by Italian judges concerning the situation of several people hailing from Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan who applied for asylum in Italy after filing similar applications in other member States (Slovenia, Sweden, Germany and Finland).
According to the Dublin III Regulation, these other member states agreed to take back the applicants, leading Italy to adopt transfer decisions in accordance with the rule that the first member state seized should examine the grant of international protection. However, the applicants contested the transfer. However, the applicants opposed the transfer.
The doubts of Italian judges
Addressing the doubts raised by Italian judges, the Court clarified that an applicant making a second asylum request must receive the 'common leaflet,' a standardized document across the EU containing information about the procedure, rights, and obligations. Furthermore, they are entitled to a personal interview.
"Moreover, they ask whether it is possible to take into account, in the context of the examination of the transfer decision, the risk of refoulement of the applicant to his or her country of origin. Those courts therefore sought clarification from the Court of Justice," the Court noted.
In this case, according to the note, "the courts of the second member State cannot examine whether the applicant, after the transfer to the first member State, risks being returned to his or her country of origin."
"It cannot be otherwise unless the courts find that there are systemic flaws in the asylum procedure and in the reception conditions for applicants for international protection in the first member State," the Court concluded in the document.