Aan de Voorzitter van de Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal Postbus EA DEN HAAG

Transcription

1 1 > Retouradres Postbus EH Den Haag Aan de Voorzitter van de Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal Postbus EA DEN HAAG Turfmarkt DP Den Haag Postbus EH Den Haag T Onderwerp Verzoek om informatie over asielnormen in de EU-lidstaten Bij beantwoording de datum en ons kenmerk vermelden. Wilt u slechts één zaak in uw brief behandelen. De Research Services van de Duitse Bundestag heeft de parlementen van een aantal lidstaten, waaronder Nederland, Italië, Frankrijk, Griekenland, Zweden, Spanje, Polen, Denemarken en de Verenigde Staten, verzocht antwoorden te formuleren op vragen inzake een studie naar Asylum standards in EU lidstaten. U hebt mij om ondersteuning bij de beantwoording gevraagd. Hierbij bied ik u de antwoorden aan op de vragen die door uw Kamer zijn gesteld. 1. Are asylum seekers housed in centralised or decentralised facilities? How are asylum seekers distributed within the country? The reception of asylum seekers is organised in a centralised manner. The Central Agency for the Reception of Asylum Seekers, or COA, has been assigned this task by the Ministry of Security and Justice. Asylum seekers are housed in numerous reception locations. Contrary to the housing of persons who are granted a residence permit, there are no specific rules aiming at an even distribution of the reception of asylum seekers within the NL (e.g. within or between provinces or municipalities). The website includes a map of the different reception locations spread throughout the Netherlands. 2. Subject to what conditions and from what time of their stay do asylum seekers have access to the labour market? Is there a "priority review" in favour of the domestic population? Asylum seekers are in principle not allowed to work during their asylum procedure during the first 6 months. After this period, the asylum seeker can be entitled by COA to work. An asylum seeker may be allowed to work for a maximum of 24 weeks. Once an asylum seeker receives a residence permit, restrictions to the right to work no longer apply (and he or she is stimulated to work). There is no prioritisation of asylum seekers or residence permit holders over national workers. 3. Is it legally possible to suspend a foreigner's obligation to leave the country in order for a course of vocational training to be carried out/completed? Removal will, as a rule, take precedence over the completion of vocational training. However, when planning the removal of a rejected asylum seeker, a Pagina 1 van 5

2 degree of care will be taken to have the removal coincide with a pause in the education. For example, if graduation is imminent, removal may be postponed for a short period as allowing this may also be helpful to ensure the cooperation of the alien with the preparation of his repatriation. There is, however, no legal right for an alien to complete vocational training before he or she leaves the country (considering also that training may well span several years). 4. Subject to what conditions and how long may foreigners with an obligation to leave the country be taken into custody under the Dublin III Regulation for the purpose of deportation and for the purpose of transfer to another EU Member State? What are the names of the relevant items of legislation? Conditions/relevant items: The relevant provision of the Dublin convention, article 28, has been implemented in Dutch Aliens legislation (the Aliens Act and the Aliens Decree 1 ) considering that a legal basis for detaining a person is a constitutional necessity. Article 59a paragraph 1 of the Aliens Act states: Our Minister may detain aliens to whom the Dublin Regulation applies, with a view to their transfer to the Member state, in accordance with article 28 of the Dublin Regulation. Paragraph 2 of Article 59(a) declares Article 59 (3) applicable, which states that an alien shall not/shall no longer be detained when he has indicated that he wishes to leave the country and also has the opportunity to do so. The Aliens Act thus has different legal provisions for the detention of illegal aliens who, usually, fall within the scope of the Return Directive (or in some cases have a short legal stay pursuant to an application for a residence permit, article 59 Aliens Act) and aliens who fall within the scope of the Dublin Regulation (59a). As a result of Directives 2013/32/EU and 2013/33/EU, legislation will in the near future make a further distinction and implement the greater part of article 8 of Directive 2013/33/EU in a new article 59b. The provision in article 28 of the Dublin Regulation that detention is only possible when there is a significant risk of absconding has led to an adjustment in national legislation in this regard. Furthermore, the Return Directive 2008/115/EC has required introducing a new legal definition of the risk of absconding (article 3(7), Directive 2008/115/EC) in national law. Article 28 of the Dublin Regulation requires a significant risk of absconding in order to allow detention. In order to make a distinction between a risk of absconding and a significant risk of absconding, the Aliens Decree distinguishes between: - criteria which in itself indicate a risk (of absconding) and - criteria which need further clarification in an individual case ( so called signifiant/light grounds to assume a risk of absconding). Two of the criteria mentioned in the Aliens Decree must always apply in each individual case. In cases governed by the Return Directive it is possible that two 1 The Aliens Decree is a bylaw of the Aliens Act. Pagina 2 van 5

3 light criteria may lead to the conclusion that there is a risk of absconding; in Dublin Regulation cases at least one of the self evident criteria must apply. The following rules are included in the Aliens Decree: Article 5.1a (1) The alien who has no legal right to stay in the country may be placed in detention in the interest of safeguarding public order or national security when: a. there is a risk that the alien will abscond, or b. the alien is avoiding or hampering the preparation of return or the removal procedure. (2) The alien may also be placed in detention in the interest of safeguarding public order or national security when: a. there is a concrete indication that a transfer as referred to in the Dublin Regulation is possible; and b. there is a significant risk that the alien will abscond. Article 5.1b 1. Conditions for detention, referred to in article 5.1a, first paragraph, are only met when at least two criteria, mentioned in the third and fourth paragraph apply. 2. Conditions for detention mentioned in article51a, second paragraph, are only met when at least two criteria of the third and fourth paragraph are met, one of them being a criterion of the third paragraph. 3. Significant grounds for detention are: a. unauthorized entry into the Netherlands or an attempt to do so; b. breaching existing aliens legislation by absconding; c. the alien was previously issued a visa, a notice, an order or a return decision which containing an obligation to leave the country to which he did notsubmit voluntarily within the time limit prescribed; d. no or insufficient cooperation in establishing identity or nationality; e. giving false or contradictory information in an application for legal stay concerning identity, nationality, travel route to the Netherlands or another Member State; f. the alien has without necessary discarded his travel or identity documents; g. the alien has used false or forged documents; h. the alien has been declared an undesirable person or is subject to an entry ban because he is a serious threat to public order; i. the alien has indicated that he will not meet his obligation to return or his obligation to travel to the Member State responsible for his asylum application. 4. Light grounds for detention exist when the alien: a. has not met existing obligations included in Chapter 4 of the Decree (i.e. for instance reporting to police, giving notice of changes in address); b. has submitted several applications for a residence permit, while none have been granted; c. has no fixed address; d. does not have sufficient means; e. is suspected or convicted of committing a crime; f. has worked without being allowed to do so. Dutch legislation does not provide a (maximum) period of detention in relation to article 59a of the Aliens Act. Article 28 of the Dublin Regulation, which is part of Pagina 3 van 5

4 the same legal provision, does however give a clear indication of the maximum period of time that each step in transferring a person may take: - Period for submitting an application to another Member State: maximum one month; - Period for approval of the other Member State: maximum two weeks - Period for making arrangements for the actual transfer: maximum six weeks. In case a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the period for submitting a take charge or take back request shall not exceed one month from the lodging of the application ( N.B. when there is no application subitted in the Netherlands, but there are clear indications that the Dublin Regulation applies as a result of an Eurodac/EUVIS- hit or as a result of a statement of the third country national, the same four week period starting from the moment the indications have risen, applies) The Member State carrying out the procedure in accordance with this Regulation shall ask for an urgent reply in such cases. Such a reply shall be given within two weeks of receipt of the request. Failure to reply within the two-week period shall be tantamount to accepting the request and shall entail the obligation to take charge or take back the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival. In case a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the transfer of that person from the requesting Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within six weeks of the implicit or explicit acceptance of the request by another Member State to take charge or to take back the person concerned or of the moment when the appeal or review no longer has suspensive effect in accordance with Article 27(3) of the Dublin Regulation. N.B. When a person has objections to the transfer and asks for a court order to prevent this transfer, the court issues his judgement within the six week time frame (in the Dutch system, Article 27(3 c) of the Dublin Regulation applies to appeals against, or reviews of, transfer decisions, ). Only in some individual cases, due to complications in court proceedings, will detention last longer than 12 weeks. 5. In the year 2014, what was the average length of asylum proceedings up to the date of the official decision? The average length of asylum proceedings is approximately 100 days. 6. What was the number of foreigners given a removal order by 31 December 2014? What was the number of effective removals in the year 2014? In 2014 the Immigration and Naturalisation Service provided approximately removal orders (including orders to Dublin countries), the Police approximately and the Royal Military Constabulary (in Dutch abbreviated as KMar) approximately It is possible that the same person receives a removal order from the Immigration and Naturalisation Service and subsequently another removal order from the Police or KMar. Pagina 4 van 5

5 The number of effective returns in 2014 is (source: KMI/VenJ). Effective returns is the sum of forced departures and assisted voluntarily departures. Data concerns persons, not cases, so double counts are excluded. The number of returns is the result of efforts in 2014 as well as previous years, therefore the number can not be directly related to the removal orders of De Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie, K.H.D.M. Dijkhoff Pagina 5 van 5