Author
The Asylum Law provides that, where applicants do not receive a final notification on the response to their first instance asylum claim after 6 months, the application will have to be considered rejected.[1] In practice, many applications last much longer than 6 months. In these cases, an automatic notification of denial is usually not provided by the OAR and applicants prefer to wait until the final decision instead of asking for a response to the authority, as they risk receiving a denial and having reception conditions and benefits withdrawn. If the applicant so wishes, however, they can lodge a judicial appeal when no response on the asylum claim is provided in time.
The backlog of asylum applications in Spain has represented a serious concern in recent years. As stated by the Spanish Ombudsperson in previous annual reports, the high number of pending cases accumulated over the years is due inter alia to the historical lack of human and material resources of the OAR and the very few measures adopted to tackle the issue.[2] In its 2024 annual report, the body continued to express concerns on the delays in accessing asylum.[3] As indicated below, the number of pending cases increased from around 35,000 cases in 2017 to more than 111,740 cases in 2019. A decrease was registered in 2021, but a significant number of cases (72,271) were still pending at the end of the year. In 2025 the number of pending cases decreased compared to previous years, with 97,275 cases pending at first instance and 121,456 pending for a resolution at the end of 2025.[4] In February 2025, CEAR observed that the backlog of pending cases increased in 2024, up to 27% compared to the previous year.[5]
| Backlog of pending cases at first instance: 2019-2025 | ||||||
| 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
| 111,740 | N/A | 72,271 | 122,035[6] | 106,546 | 133,102 | 97,275 |
In its 2025 annual report, the NGO CEAR continued to highlight that, despite being the second EU country to receive the most applications – second only to Germany – Spain continues to remain one of the EU countries with the lowest international protection recognition rate (18.5%), almost 30 points below the European average of 46.6%.[7] Looking at 2025 figures (released by the Minister of Interior at the beginning of 2026), CEAR warned of a decline in the protection rate of more than seven points in 2025, reaching 11% and marking a sharp reversal of the improvement seen the previous year, when Spain was already at the back of the queue in the EU in recognising the right to asylum.[8] In addition, the organisation highlighted the high number of asylum decisions (160,663) taken in 2025, which represented almost 67% more than in 2024, making it the highest figure since the OAR was created in 1992. According to CEAR, this milestone is mainly due to the “automation” of responses received by certain nationalities (Venezuela, Colombia, Peru, Senegal, Mali and Burkina Faso), which means that an individualised and in-depth examination of each application is not always carried out. As a result, the backlog of applications pending resolution is slightly lower than in 2024, although 218,731 people are still waiting for a decision.
In 2025, the OAR published for the first time disaggregated data related to the grounds for the granting refugee status (covering decisions taken in 2024). 24.53% of cases related to gender grounds, the 8.53% were due to belonging to a particular social group, 15.57% for nationality, 11.36% for sexual orientation, 30.94% for political grounds, 0.99% for race, 2.64% for religion, and 5.44% for other grounds.[9]
Since mid-2025, Accem started to observe the practice by the OAR of using automatic lists of countries the office uses to grant or deny subsidiary protection (i.e. Mali and Palestine are in the list of those who are granted protection, while Peru and Senegal are among those who are denied protection).[10]
Prioritised examination and fast-track processing
Article 25 of the Asylum Law lays down the urgent procedure, a prioritised procedure whereby the application will be examined under the same procedural guarantees as the regular procedure, but within a time limit of 3 months instead of 6 months.[11]
The urgent procedure is applicable in the following circumstances:[12]
- The application is manifestly well-founded;
- The application was made by a person with special needs, especially unaccompanied minors;
- The applicant raises only issues which have no connection with the examination of the requirements for recognition of refugee status or subsidiary protection;
- The applicant comes from a safe country of origin and has the nationality of that country or, in case of statelessness has residence in the country;
- The applicant applies after a period of one month, without justification; or
- The applicant falls within any of the exclusion grounds under the Asylum Law.
The urgent procedure is also applied to applicants who have been admitted to the in-merit procedure after lodging a claim at the border or within the CIE.[13] Recent statistics on the use of the urgent procedure were not available at the time of writing of this report.
The authority in charge of the asylum decision is the Ministry of Interior, like all the other asylum procedures in Spain. CIAR, which is responsible for the case examination, will be informed of the urgency of the cases.[14]
Personal interview
Article 17 of the Asylum Law states that asylum applications are formalised by the conduct of a personal interview, which will always be conducted individually. This legislative provision is respected in practice, as all asylum seekers are interviewed.[15] The law also provides the possibility of carrying out other interviews with the applicant after the initial one foreseen for the formalisation of the asylum claim. These interviews can take place any time during the procedure after the claim is declared admissible.
The same disposition further provides that, when necessary, the authorities will take measures to provide an adequate treatment during the interview based on the gender of the asylum seeker or in case of the other circumstances foreseen in Article 46 of the Asylum Law (i.e. the applicant is a pregnant woman, a victim of trafficking, an unaccompanied child, asylum seekers with mental disabilities, etc.). As the Asylum Regulation has not been adopted so far, no other details are provided by law. In practice, gender issues are in general taken into consideration for asylum interviews (interviewer and interpreter) as far as possible, but the availability of interpreters depends on the city where the interview is being conducted. The asylum seeker can require gender issues are taken into consideration during asylum interviews as far as he/she is informed about such right he/she is entitled to.
When applicants go to their registration appointment with the OAR, they undergo a first interview, with or without a lawyer, given that the assistance of a lawyer is mandatory only for applications lodged at borders and CIE. The interview is held in private offices which generally fulfil adequate standards with regard to privacy and confidentiality, but this situation can vary from one region to another.
Police and border guards also have the competence to register asylum applications, and, in these cases, they are the authority in charge of conducting the first asylum interview. This mostly happens to asylum claims made at borders and from CIEs, but also for asylum claims lodged on the territory given the lack of capacity and resources of the OAR. They do not decide on the application for international protection, however, as this is the sole responsibility of the OAR.
When the case is then forwarded to the OAR for examination, the caseworker in charge may decide to hold a second interview with the applicant when they consider the information in the case file to be insufficient.[16] The case examination reports do not systematically refer to whether a second interview is necessary, although the law states that the decision to hold further interviews must be motivated. Interviews with the Social Work Units (UTS) are carried out by phone.
Interviews are always conducted individually. As far as the author is aware, indicators to detect vulnerabilities are used for cases of trafficking or LGTBIQ+ at airports. No public information on whether specific guidelines are used to detect other vulnerabilities is available. The author is also aware that the OAR has been creating thematic groups of specialised officers (i.e. on children), in order to better assess cases accordingly. In relation to the interview of children seeking asylum, the general practice is that just UAMs are interviewed.
In its 2024 annual report, the EUAA included concerns highlighted by the NGO Fundación Cepaim regarding the fact that personal interviews in Spain were not carried out by the determining authority but by police officers without adequate training, in an inadequate environment and without the necessary legal counsel and information. In addition, the lack of sufficient consideration of individual circumstances for applicants from countries with a high influx of asylum seekers, such as Colombia and Venezuela, for which ‘model’ decisions were used was highlighted.[17]
According to UNHCR, in 2025 asylum interviews continued to lack the necessary quality to support fair decision-making. These interviews are carried out by the police instead of by the deciding authority. While acknowledging the important efforts carried out by the police in a context of consistently high numbers of asylum seekers over several years, the fact that the deciding authority does not directly interview asylum seekers remains, in UNHCR´s view, problematic. In this context, UNHCR welcomed the efforts of the asylum authorities to enhance the quality of asylum interviews by issuing detailed instructions to police authorities for interviewing asylum applicants. UNHCR supported this effort by delivering multiple training sessions on interviewing techniques to police officers in specific locations and by supporting the roll-out of an online self-study course for police officers.[18]
Interpretation
Article 18 of the Asylum Law provides the right of all asylum seekers to have an interpreter. This is respected in practice.
Since June 2016, the Ministry of Interior entrusted services on the provision of interpreters to the OAR and all police offices to the Ofilingua-Seprotec translation private company. Since then, several shortcomings have been reported, mainly due to the lack of knowledge of the asylum and migration field. In addition, a lack of proper expertise in interpretation techniques has been detected in many cases. It is thus common for some interpreters to make personal comments going beyond their interpretation role in front of the interviewer and at the risk of including subjective considerations in the asylum interview. There are also interpreters who do not speak adequate Spanish, so in many circumstances the statements made by the asylum seeker are not properly reflected in the interview. In addition, interpreters who were working before with NGOs have reported a reduction of pay and deterioration of working conditions, thereby potentially affecting the quality of their work.
In cases of less common languages, asylum interviews are postponed, and the concerned asylum seeker is not informed in advance but only on the day of the cancelled interview. In some cases, interpretation during asylum interviews has been carried out by phone, because the company did not consider arranging the deployment of the interpreter from their city to the place of the interview.
Following the COVID-19 outbreak in 2020, interpreting services were adapted accordingly, mainly through the increase in the use of technological tools (i.e. phone and programmes such as Meet, Zoom, Teams), with overall positive outcomes. Challenges arose in some cases, however, due to the difficulty for asylum seekers to access computers or accessing internet connection. These tools continued to be used in 2025, and with some challenges in the quality of interpretation.[19]
Some provinces can still face difficulties in providing interpreters for some languages (such as, among others, Pashtu, Somali, and Fula) on time and when needed. The quality of interpretation and the lack of knowledge of the interpreters on international protection continued to represent a concern.[20] Due to this, sometimes lawyers and asylum seekers are asked to move from the place they are to the closest place where interpretation can be provided.
Video conferencing for the purpose of interpretation is rare, as it is usually carried out by phone. Video conferencing is used in the cases of asylum seekers who are in prison or in the case of applications made from the enclaves of Melilla or Ceuta.
In April 2024, the UNHCR launched the translation into Spanish of the handbook for interpreters in the asylum procedure.[21]
In May 2025, the UNHCR and Accem launched the first multilingual glossary with specific terminology related to international protection used by newly arrived individuals in Spain, in order to facilitate communication and access to information from the earliest stages of reception. The languages included in the glossary are Spanish, Arabic, Bambara, French, Soninke, and Wolof.[22]
In partnership with the NGO Accem, UNHCR continued to provide interpretation services to the police, NGOs, lawyers and reception centres, primarily in African minority languages, to support their work with new arrivals in the Canary Islands. In 2025, 7,000 individuals of various nationalities (including Mali, Senegal, Sudan, Somalia, Morocco, Guinea Conakry and The Gambia) were provided interpretation through this support, significantly improving communication possibilities in their native languages and enhancing the identification of people with specific needs and in need of international protection, as well as facilitating referrals to services and the asylum procedure.
In 2025, UNHCR´s interpreters project focused particularly on supporting the authorities in communication in the asylum procedures and in identifying international protection needs of unaccompanied children, mainly those arriving in the Canary Islands. Significant interpretation support was provided to the police in asylum interviews and to the child protection authorities in the Canary Islands.
UNHCR promoted a strategy to improve the quality of interpretation within the asylum system through exchanges and trainings with relevant actors, and by leading a working group on interpretation services in the asylum system, jointly with Accem. This group served as a forum for exchange and the promotion of good practices, bringing together authorities, universities, NGOs and companies providing interpretation services.[23]
Recording and transcript
While the first interview is never audio-or video recorded, this is always the case for the second interview. As a rule, the minutes of the interview are transcribed verbatim, although there have been cases in which interviews were not transcribed verbatim or in which a summary was drafted without necessarily reflecting all the statements made by the asylum seeker, no particular issues have been raised regarding the transcription of interviews. It should be further noted that interviewers are allowed to assess whether or not certain issues expressed by the asylum seeker during the interview should be included to the transcript, which is thus completely arbitrary.
First appeal before the National Court
When the asylum applicant wants to appeal against the first instance decision, there are two types of appeals they can lodge:
- An administrative appeal for reversal (Recurso de reposición); or
- A judicial appeal before the National Court (Audiencia Nacional).
None of the appeals have automatic suspensive effect, and none of them foresee a hearing of the applicant.[24]
The first type of appeal should be submitted before the OAR under the Ministry of Interior, within 1 month from the notification of refusal.[25] It marks the end to the administrative procedure, and therefore it is optional as the lawyer can appeal directly to the courts. This first option for appealing is based on points of law and does not assess the facts. For this reason, the applicant and their lawyer may prefer to file the contentious administrative appeal. An increase of administrative appeals has been registered in the last couple of years, as it allows for the application of cautionary measures and for the request of the suspension of the expulsion order, as foreseen by the administrative procedure.[26]
An appeal against a negative decision on the merits of the claim can be filed before the Administrative Chamber of the High National Court (Audiencia Nacional) within 2 months term from the notification of the asylum denial.[27] This appeal is not limited to points of law but also extends to the facts, therefore the Court may re-examine evidence submitted at first instance. If the Court finds that the applicant should be granted protection it has the power to grant itself the protection status to the applicant and it is not necessary to return the case to the Ministry for review.
Decisions of the Audiencia Nacional are publicly available in the CENDOJ database.
Nonetheless, it should be kept in mind that there is no deadline for the Court to decide, and that the average time for ruling is from 1 to 2 years, closer to 2 years in the last years. During this period, if the applicant has expired it maximum duration within the asylum reception system (18 months), the person will have no reception conditions.
The length of asylum appeals remains an area of concern for national authorities and is criticised by some civil society organisations. For example, the NGOs ‘Progestión’ and Convive-Fundación Cepaim have highlighted that the duration of the appeals procedure is excessively lengthy in Spain.[28]
For this reason, most applicants and their lawyers prefer to collect more documentation to support the asylum application, in order to present a new asylum claim. In fact, the Asylum Law does not set a limit number of asylum applications per person, and as mentioned in the section on Subsequent Applications, it does not establish a specific procedure for subsequent applications.
In 2024, 119 administrative and 4,340 judicial appeals were rejected.[29] Figures for 2025 are not available at the time of writing, as the OAR usually publishes such information in the second half of the year.
In a decision taken in November 2022, the Supreme Court (Tribunal Supremo) established that, while a decision on the appeal is pending, all the benefits granted during the processing of the asylum application (concretely the residence and work permit) should be extended.[30]
In 2025, UNHCR continued to share periodically a country-of-origin information bulletin and a quarterly judicial update summarizing relevant international and national judicial decisions on asylum, distributing them among asylum authorities and other counterparts, including members of the judiciary.[31]
Onward appeal before the Supreme Court
In case of a rejection of the appeal, a further onward appeal is possible before the Supreme Court (Tribunal Supremo),[32] which in case of a positive finding has the power to grant the applicant with an international protection status.
Legal assistance
Spanish legislation and Article 18(1)(b) of the Asylum Law guarantee the right to legal assistance to asylum seekers from the beginning and throughout all stages of the procedure. This assistance will be provided free of charge to those who lack sufficient financial means to cover it, both in the administrative procedure and the potential judicial proceedings. It is also established that NGOs can provide legal assistance to asylum seekers.
When expressing the will to apply for international protection, and depending on where the person is applying for asylum, the applicant is informed about the right to free legal assistance during the procedure, about the possibility to be assisted by a lawyer from an NGO, from a Bar association or a private lawyer (generally paid), and the person is provided with the relevant contacts (i.e. NGOs working at local level and provincial Bar association). In many cases, it is the lawyer present at the reception facility that provides legal assistance to asylum seekers.
Legal assistance at first instance
Access to legal assistance, as well as the quality and the expertise of the services provided varies significantly across the different Spanish regions and cities.
The Supreme Court has highlighted the obligation of the State to provide effective access to legal assistance during the procedure, without which the individual is in a state of “real and effective helplessness, which is aggravated in the case of foreigners who are not familiar with the language and Spanish law, and which may have annulling effect on administrative acts”.[34] Beyond merely informing applicants of the possibility to receive legal aid, the authorities are required to indicate in the case file whether the asylum seeker has accepted or rejected legal aid in the procedure.[35]
To guarantee asylum seekers’ rights, some Bar Associations from the southern cities of Andalucía have created ad hoc teams of lawyers.
Similarly, in 2022, the Bar Association of Madrid and UNHCR agreed to improve the service to provide legal assistance to persons in need of international protection, as well as to refugees and statelessness persons. In light of such agreement, the Bar Association of Madrid has created a specialised unit on international protection, aiming at facilitating access to asylum seekers’ rights, including the right to be documented, the freedom of movement, as well as the rights to reception, employment, health, education and any other rights fostering their protection in Spain.[36] A similar agreement was established between the Bar Association of Murcia and UNHCR, including through the creation of a specialized Legal Guidance Service on International Protection within the Bar Association.[37] The same initiative was implemented with the Bar Association of Almería.[38]
Despite UNHCR’s financial constraints that led to the closure, by mid-2025, of UNHCR’s legal assistance projects with the Bar Associations of Murcia and Almería, and to a reduction in the activities carried out by the Madrid Bar Association, the three Bar Associations nonetheless provided assistance to 1,370 people on international protection-related issues and associated rights.[39]
At the beginning of 2023, the Spanish General Council of Lawyers started a service to support Bar Associations in the different Spanish provinces on immigration and international protection, with the aim of assuring a quality service, to unify criteria of legal support to migrants and asylum seekers and increase the knowledge on the situation and needs of newcomers.[40]
Since 2018, no information was provided by the OAR on the number of requests for legal assistance received.
Legal assistance in appeals
The level of financial compensation awarded to legal aid lawyers is established by each bar association. It does not differ based on the type of cases – asylum-related or other – taken up by lawyers.
[1] Article 24(3) Asylum Law.
[2] Defensor del Pueblo, ‘Informe Anual 2019. Volumen I – Informe de Gestión’, 2020, p. 170, available here.
[3] Defensor del Pueblo, ‘Informe Anual 2024. ’, March 2025, available here.
[4] Ministerio del Interior, Subsecretaría del Interior, Dirección General de Protección Internacional, ‘Avance de datos de protección internacional, aplicación del Reglamento de Dublín y reconocimiento del estatuto de apátrida. Datos provisionales acumulados entre el 1 de enero y el 31 de diciembre de 2025’, January 2026, available here.
[5] El Diario, ‘CEAR denuncia que han crecido un 27 % las peticiones de asilo por resolver, hasta 242.000’, 11 February 2025, available here.
[6] This figure includes both pending cases for resolution (92,152) and pending cases for admission (29,883). Ministerio del Interior, ‘AVANCE de datos de protección internacional, aplicación del Reglamento de Dublín y reconocimiento del estatuto de apátrida Datos provisionales acumulados entre el 1 de enero y el 31 de diciembre de 2022’, 2023, available here.
[7] Abogacía Española, ‘CEAR denuncia que España continúa a la cola en conceder solicitudes de asilo en la UE, a pesar de ser el segundo país que más peticiones recibe’, 17 June 2025, available here; CEAR, ‘Informe 2025. Las personas refugiadas en España y Europa’, June 2026, available here.
[8] CEAR, ‘El reconocimiento de asilo vuelve a bajar en España pese al aumento de las necesidades de protección a nivel global’, 3 February 2026, available here.
[9] Ministerio del Interior, Ofician de Asilo y Refugio, ‘Asilo en cifras 2024’, November 2025, available here.
[10] Information provided by Accem’s legal service in March 2026.
[11] Article 25(4) Asylum Law.
[12] Article 25(1) Asylum Law.
[13] Article 25(2) Asylum Law.
[14] Article 25(3) Asylum Law.
[15] Information provided by Accem’s legal service in March 2023.
[16] Article 17(8) Asylum Law.
[17] EUAA, ‘Asylum report 2024’, June 2024, p. 106, available here.
[18] Information provided by UNHCR in March 2026.
[19] Information provided by Accem’s legal service in March 2026.
[20] Information provided by Accem’s interpretation service in March 2026.
[21] UNHCR-ACNUR, ‘Manual para intérpretes en procedimientos de asilo’, April 2024, available here.
[22] ACNUR, ‘ACNUR y Accem lanzan el primer glosario multilingüe especializado en terminología relacionada con la protección internacional’, 26 May 2025, available here.
[23] Information provided by UNHCR in March 2026.
[24] Article 29(2) Asylum Law.
[25] Article 29(1) Asylum Law.
[26] Information provided by Accem’s legal service in March 2026.
[27] Article 29(2) Asylum Law; Article 46 Law 29/1998 of 13 July 1998 concerning the regulation of jurisdiction of administrative courts.
[28] EUAA, ‘Asylum report 2023’, November 2025, available here.
[29] Ministerio del Interior, ‘Asilo en cifras 2024’, 2024, available here.
[30] Iustel, ‘Declara el Supremo que mientras se resuelve el recurso sobre la solicitud de asilo se han de prorrogar los beneficios concedidos provisionalmente durante la tramitación del procedimiento’, 22 February 2023, available here.
[31] Information provided by UNHCR in March 2026.
[32] Article 29(2) Asylum Law.
[33] Tribunal Supremo, Sala de lo Contencioso, STS 4002/2022, 2 November 2022, available here.
[34] Supreme Court, Decision STS 3186/2013, 17 June 2013, available here.
[35] Supreme Court, Decision STS 4316/2015, 19 October 2015, available here.
[36] El Imperial, ‘La Abogacía de Madrid y ACNUR refuerzan la atención legal a solicitantes de protección internacional’, 15 July 2022, available at here.
[37] La Verdad, ‘El Colegio de Abogados de Murcia y Acnur impulsan la atención legal a solicitantes de protección internacional’, 21 September 2022, available here.
[38] La Vanguardia, ‘Acnur y Abogados de Almería crearán Oficina Protección Internacional’, 24 June 2022, available here; Diario de Almería, ‘ACNUR y el Colegio de Abogados de Almería renuevan su colaboración en favor de una atención especializada en protección internacional’, 2 March 2023, available here.
[39] Information provided by UNHCR in March 2026.
[40] Consejo General Abogacía Española, ‘La Abogacía pone en marcha el servicio de calidad y apoyo a los Colegios en materia de Extranjería’, 1 February 2023, available here.
[41] Audiencia Nacional, Decision SAN 3274/2017, 21 July 2017, available here.