Author
Adequate support during the interview
In cooperation with UNHCR Austria, IOM and LEFÖ BFA, officials of the BFA are offered training sessions providing targeted information on vulnerable groups.[1] These trainings further aim to strengthen their understanding of first-instance procedures and adequate measures to be adopted to ensure a high-quality of interpretation.[2] In addition to the trainings that have been organised on a regular basis since 2016, officials of the BFA are also supported in their day-to-day work through the development of certain tools. UNHCR further develops specific assessment methods for the evaluation of asylum procedures. It selects the focus point for the assessment of the decisions and provides samples of interviews and decisions to train quality assessors of the BFA accordingly.
In recent years, concerns about the quality and sensitivity of decision-making in sexual‑orientation and gender‑identity (SOGI) asylum cases have persisted in Austria. In 2018, two high‑profile cases involving homosexual applicants prompted public criticism when their claims were rejected as “untrustworthy,” leading to an investigation and the revocation of the responsible BFA case officer’s decision‑making license; the BFA acknowledged that the decision’s language and wording fell below qualitative standards. Civil society, notably Queer Base, highlighted inadequate staff training. The Ministry of Interior pointed to ongoing training and noted that LGBTI‑specific modules were planned even before the scandal. Since 2019, the BVwG has offered a voluntary SOGI‑sensitivity course for judges in cooperation with Queer Base, and the BFA’s annual training program includes a Queer Base module on identifying and addressing the needs of particularly vulnerable persons. Nonetheless, recurring concerns remain about bias and stereotyping in interviews and decisions; in 2021, a case represented by Queer Base became public in which the BFA reportedly asked inappropriate questions about the applicant’s sexual life and, according to the applicant, required her to undress.[3]
If an asylum applicant bases the fear of persecution on infringements of their right to sexual self-determination, they should be interviewed by an official of the same sex, unless requested otherwise.[4] In the procedure before the BVwG, this rule should apply only if asylum applicants have already claimed an infringement of their right to sexual self-determination before the BFA or in the written appeal. The Constitutional Court (VfGH) has ruled that a judge of the same sex should decide on the appeal regardless of whether a public hearing is organised or the decision is exclusively based on the file.[5] However, a similar provision for interpreters is lacking, however.
Each member of a family must submit a separate application for international protection. During the interview they are asked whether they have individual reasons to apply for protection or whether they want to rely on the reasons of one of their family members. Accompanied children are represented in the procedure by their parents, who are requested to submit the reasons on behalf of their children.
Exemption from special procedures
If it is deemed highly probable that the applicant has suffered from torture or other serious forms of physical, psychological, or sexual violence, the application shall not be dismissed in the admissibility procedure.[6]
Moreover, asylum claims lodged by vulnerable asylum applicants (e.g. victims or torture or violence and unaccompanied children) should in principle not be processed in airport procedures. However, in practice, in the absence of effective vulnerability identification mechanism, vulnerable applicants continue to be subject to airport procedures. Moreover, vulnerable applicants may also be subject to accelerated procedures for national security reasons.[7]
[1] Answer to parliamentarian request, No 1571/AB, 2 November 2018, available in German here.
[2] UNHCR, Projekt Bidge, availalel in German here.
[3] See for more details: AIDA, Country Report: Austria – Update on the year 2024, July 2025, available here.
[4] Article 20(1) AsylG.
[5] VfGH, U 688-690/12-19, 27 September 2012, available in German here.
[6] Article 30 AsylG.
[7] Information provided to asylkoordination österreich at a meeting with stakeholders, March 2023.