Regular procedure

Author

Croatian Law Centre Visit Website

General (scope, time limits)

The procedure for granting international protection in Croatia is an administrative procedure regulated by the Law on International and Temporary Protection (LITP). Additionally, the Law on General Administrative Procedure is applied in the procedure, unless otherwise provided by the LITP. Articles 38-40 of LITP regulate the regular procedure.

The first instance decision can be a decision by which the Ministry of Interior:

• Grants asylum;
• Grants subsidiary protection;
• Rejects the application if the applicant does not meet the conditions for asylum and subsidiary protection;
• Rejects the application if the conditions are met for exclusion;
• Rejects the application as manifestly unfounded if reasons for the accelerated procedure have been met;
• Dismisses a subsequent application as inadmissible; or
• Suspends the procedure.

The Ministry of Interior’s Department for international protection procedures has the obligation to take a decision on the application for international protection within six months from its lodging. If no decision can be issued within six months, the applicant shall be informed of it in writing and, at his or her request, shall be provided with information about the reasons for the failure to respect the time limit and about the time needed before which he or she may expect a decision. The six-month time limit may be exceptionally prolonged for additional nine months and another three months. It may be extended for a further nine months if:

• The application includes complex facts and/or legal issues;
• A large number of third-country nationals or stateless persons are requesting international protection at the same time; or
• The applicant, through his or her actions, contrary to his or her obligations as applicant, causes the time limit to be extended.

However, this time limit may be extended for a further three months exclusively in order to ensure the complete consideration of the application.[2]

The Ministry of Interior does not keep records on the duration of the first instance procedure.[3]

If it is justifiable to be expect that no decision will be issued within the time limits referred above on account of the temporary unsafe situation in the country of origin, the Ministry shall check the situation in the country of origin at least every six months and inform the applicant and the European Commission within a reasonable time of the reasons for failure to issue a decision. In that case, a decision must be issued no later than within 21 months from the day the application is lodged.[4]

Prioritised examination and fast-track processing

Applications by unaccompanied children are prioritised as specified by the LITP.[5] Additionally, applications which may be approved on the basis of the established facts  (meaning that international protection will be granted) also has priority in decision-making.[6]

According to the Ministry of Interior, priority in the decision-making process is given to applications of unaccompanied children. However, in 2023, all decisions which related to unaccompanied children were decisions on suspension of the procedure. In addition, a prioritised examination is conducted in the cases of vulnerable groups, accelerated procedure, subsequent applications and for applicants with restricted freedom of movement. [7]

Personal interview

After a short initial interview conducted by the officials from the Reception Centre for Applicants for International Protection for the purpose of lodging an application, a substantive interview is conducted by the Department for international protection procedure of the Ministry of Interior. According to the LITP, when the application has been lodged, the Ministry of Interior shall, as soon as possible, interview the applicant. During the interview, the applicant is obliged to present all circumstances relevant to the application for international protection, truthfully answer all questions, and submit all available evidence to support the application and give credible and convincing explanations of all the reasons behind the application for international protection.[8]

Officials of the Department for the international protection procedure are trained on interviewing technics and interviewing vulnerable persons. An unaccompanied child shall attend the interview in person in the presence of the special guardian.[11] The procedure upon the application of an unaccompanied child shall be conducted by an official of the Ministry of the Interior trained to work with children.[12]

If possible, applicants shall be provided ex officio with a translator/interpreter of the same sex in order to ensure a full explanation of the reasons for the application or for other justified reasons.[13] However, there is no information to what extent is this implemented in practice. The interpreter must be reliable, impartial and must translate truthfully and accurately during the procedure.[14]

The interview may be omitted:

• When a positive decision on application may be taken on the basis of the available evidence;
• In cases when an applicant is unfit or unable to be interviewed, owing to enduring circumstances beyond his or her control; or
• When the admissibility of a subsequent application is being assessed.[15]

The Ministry of Interior does not keep records of conducted interviews, however they reported that in 2023, for 12 applicants for international protection whose applications for international protection were rejected in accordance with Article 39, paragraph 4. of the LITP,  the decisions were made without conducting an interview.[16] Article 39 regulates the suspension of procedure for international protection. However, paragraph 4 of Article 39 specifies that exceptionally the Ministry of Interior may, in the case referred to in paragraph 2, points 2 and 3 of Article 39 (i.e.,  when it is deemed that the applicant has withdrawn the application if the applicant does not respond to the summons to an interview, and does not justify such absence within 2 days of the scheduled interview (point 2) or leaves the place of  residence for longer than 2 days without the consent of the Reception Center for Applicants of International Protection (point 3)), reject the applicant’s application if, on the basis of the established facts and circumstances, it assesses that the conditions for granting international protection have not been met.

The LITP provides that the applicant shall give reasons if they refuse to cooperate with the official conducting the interview. The Ministry shall consider the reasons and shall inform the applicant orally for the record of its decision.[17]

In addition, the interpreter must be reliable, impartial and must interpret truthfully and accurately. He or she is obliged to act pursuant to the regulations governing the protection of personal data, and especially may not disclose the data such as personal and other information collected during the procedure.

If for objective reasons it is not possible to provide an interpreter for a specific language, the Ministry of Interior shall request assistance from another Member State of the European Economic Area.

The LITP prescribes that interpretation can be provided by means of electronic telecommunications or audio-visual equipment.[24] In 2023, one interview was conducted via video conference.[25]

Recording and transcript

During the interview, verbatim minutes of the interview are drafted. Once the interview is finished, the interpreter translates the minutes to the applicant who then has a possibility to make corrections, interventions, as well as to add information if needed. Generally, in practice, the quality of the minutes is not considered problematic, although there were cases in the past in which minutes were not considered to be of sufficient quality by the applicants. It also depends on the interpreter whether he or she summarises the answers (which they should not do), or translates each sentence of the applicant (which is how they should translate). By signing the minutes, the applicant agrees with the content of the transcript.

However, in the Ombudsperson report for 2023, it was reported that CSOs and attorneys at law pointed out that not all statements made by the applicant are recorded in the minutes compiled during the procedure, but the content of the statement is often summarized, so it can happen that important details are lost which may result in an improperly established factual situation, i.e., an improper assessment that the applicant statement is incoherent, inconsistent or incorrect.[26]

Appeal

Appeal before the Administrative Court

Decisions of the Ministry of Interior may be challenged before the Administrative Court.[28] According to the law, the time limit for an applicant to lodge the lawsuit to the Administrative Court in the regular procedure is 30 days after the delivery of the decision of the Ministry of Interior.[29]

In the Croatian Law Centre’s experience, there is no information specifying that applicants face obstacles in challenging a decision in practice, although some issues arise with regard to legal assistance (see Legal assistance).

Each asylum case is examined by a single judge. Judges are not specialised on asylum matters, although from time to time some trainings are organised for judges (usually by UNHCR and NGOs). As documented in the previous updates of this AIDA country report, several trainings have been organised by the Croatian Law centre with the financial support of UNHCR since 2016.

In 2023, the training of Administrative court judges, financially supported by UNHCR, was held. The topic of the training was appropriate gender considerations in the procedure for international protection and strict application of gender-sensitive procedures. A total of 9 judges and judicial advisors from the Administrative courts in Zagreb, Osijek and Rijeka and High Administrative Court participated at the training.

In 2023, the launch of the Croatian version of the HELP/UNHCR Course on Asylum and Human Rights took place. The launch was accompanied by a seminar organised by the Council of Europe HELP Programme in cooperation with the Croatian Judicial Academy. Around 25 participants from four Administrative Courts and the High Administrative Court, as well as the representative of the Ministry of Justice and Public Administration of Croatia registered to follow course. The course presented one of the Croatian authorities’ measures to implement the ECHR judgment in M.H. and Others v. Croatia.[30]

The court holds a hearing in the presence of the applicant in the majority of cases. Exceptions may occur when the applicant’s whereabouts are unknown. Interpreters are provided and paid by the State and available during the administrative dispute. The hearings are not public. In 2021, the Law on Administrative Disputes was amended introducing inter alia the possibility for the court to carry out the hearing remotely through the use of appropriate audio-visual devices.[31]

The Court can freely assess the evidence and establish the facts (requesting also further evidence if needed) – without being bound by the facts established in the procedure of the Ministry of Interior – while determining refugee status, although it takes them into account when deciding. Evidence, in terms of the Law on Administrative Disputes, includes documents, interviews of the parties, experts’ opinions and findings and other means of collecting evidence, and the court presents it according to the rules for presenting evidence in the civil procedure.[32] In general, there is no time limit set in law for the Administrative Court to make a decision in the regular procedure.

The outcomes of the administrative dispute can be that the lawsuit is dismissed as inadmissible (and therefore not decided on the merits), rejected (i.e., decided negatively on the merits), or allowed. If the lawsuit is allowed, the Court can either refer the case back to the Ministry of Interior for the review procedure or it can change the decision by itself, meaning that the result is granting refugee or subsidiary protection status. The court decisions are not publicly available.

Administrative Courts reported the following decisions in 2023:

Source: Administrative Court of Zagreb,12 January 2024; Administrative Court of Rijeka, 19 January 2024; Administrative Court of Osijek, 29 January 2024; Administrative Court of Split, 30 January 2024.

Onward appeal before the High Administrative Court

Applicants may lodge a further appeal against the Administrative Court decision before a High Administrative Court. According to the Law on Administrative Disputes, the High Administrative Court shall reject the appeal as unfounded and uphold the first-instance judgment (i.e., the judgment of the Administrative Court) when determined that there are no reasons for the judgment to be challenged or that the reasons do not affect the adoption of a different decision. In addition, the High Administrative Court shall annul the first-instance judgment and shall solely remedy the deficiencies and resolve the matter by issuing a judgment if it determines that the administrative court has committed a substantial violation of the rules of court procedure, has erroneously or incompletely determined the factual state or has inaccurately applied the substantive law.[33]  This means that the High Administrative Court can decide on the merits and can grant international protection.

This appeal, however, does not have suspensive effect.[34] During 2023, the High Administrative Court received 17 appeals in international protection cases:

Source: High Administrative Court, 21 January 2024.

As indicated above, the large majority of appeals were also rejected by the High Administrative Court.

Legal assistance

The right to free legal assistance in procedures is regulated by LITP and by the Ordinance on free legal aid in the procedure of granting international protection. There is also a general procedure and system of free legal aid which is regulated by the Law on Free Legal Aid, but applicants for international protection can only benefit from this law in some procedures for which legal aid is not provided for by the specific law (for example LITP).

Legal assistance at first instance

The LITP provides for the possibility of legal information and counselling at first instance procedure before the Ministry of Interior.[35] The LITP specifies that applicants should, at their request, be provided with legal and procedural information on the approval of international protection, taking into account the circumstances of the specific case, in a language which it may be reasonably be presumed that they understand and in which they are able to communicate. The right to counselling should be provided by organisations working to protect the rights of refugees or by attorneys with whom the Ministry shall conclude an agreement on the provision of legal counselling. An applicant who has no financial resources or items of significant value that enable him or her to have an appropriate standard of living shall have the right to legal counselling. According to the Ordinance on free legal aid in the procedure of granting international protection, ‘items of significant value’ refer to the applicant’s belongings and to those of members of her/his household, which includes her/his real estate and movable property.[36]

A public call under the AMIF fund for legal aid providers was published by the Ministry of Interior in September 2021.[37] The Croatian Law Centre (CLC) was selected in 2022 as organisation responsible for providing legal counselling at first instance until the end of 2022. The legal counselling activities entailed provision of: general legal information related to the procedure for granting international protection, legal information on the right to work and the right to free legal aid to applicants for international protection, legal and procedural information on the granting of international protection related to the specific application for international protection, information on stage of submitted application for international protection, the  explanation of reasons why the application for international protection  was rejected and the possibility of using a legal remedy. Under the project  informative materials and brochures on the ways and conditions of exercising the right to legal counselling were prepared, and a mobile application on the main features of the procedure for granting international protection in the Republic of Croatia and the ways of exercising the rights of applicants for international protection in practice was developed.[38] The information contained in the mobile application is also available online: https://rhprotection.mup.hr/hr/. No new public call was published in 2023.

In 2023, CLC implemented the project “Legal Assistance and Capacity Building for Access to Territory and Asylum in Croatia” with the role of implementing partner and with the financial support of the UNHCR. The provision of legal information to targeted groups of beneficiaries including to applicants for international protection, was usually provided by telephone, mobile applications (WhatsApp) and e-mail or in CLC’s office.

Centre for Peace Studies (CPS)[39] also provided legal support to applicants for international protection by telephone, mobile and e-mail or in CPS ‘s office. Free legal aid was also provided by Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS)[40] and Borders:none.[41]

Legal assistance in appeals

In practice there are no obstacles to accessing attorneys, as applicants are informed about their right to free legal assistance. In practice when a decision is delivered to applicants, they are also given the list of providers of free legal aid from which they can choose an attorney or lawyer from NGOs, who are then notified by the competent employee of the Ministry of Interior. Further communication takes place between the attorney and the applicant. The procedure is the same for applicants accommodated in the reception centers for applicants for international procedure and  in the reception centers for foreigners.[45]

Attorneys and lawyers from NGOs organise the interpreter (among those who have contract with the Ministry of Interior) for the appointment and then inform the Ministry of Interior.

In 2023, the number of requests for free legal aid was 79. However, the Ministry of Interior does not keep records on the types of procedures (i.e., regular, accelerated etc.) for which free legal aid was requested.[46]

Civil Rights Project Sisak emphasized as questionable and problematic the absence of criteria according to which providers of free legal aid are chosen by applicants for international protection from the list of providers of legal aid. They stressed that the rule of a certain number of representations during the year per authorized provider of free legal aid should be introduced.[47]

The Administrative Court shall decide on the right to free legal assistance, and the amount of costs of legal assistance.[48] According to the Ordinance on free legal aid, the Administrative Court decides on the right to free legal assistance and takes into account the evidence on the financial status of the applicant, which is obtained ex officio by the Ministry of Interior during the first instance procedure on the one side and by compiling the form by the applicant on the other side. In practice that means that at the beginning of the first instance procedure, the applicant has to specify, by completing a form provided to them, if they carry any valuables with them, which is rarely the case.

In previous years, it was emphasised that this system of granting the right to legal aid at the end of the procedure is unfair as the full burden and risk is shifted to the provider of free legal aid. If, for any reason, the court does not endorse free legal aid, the provider will not receive anything and has completed the work without payment. This is still considered problematic in 2020 as reported by one attorney,[49] however no such observations were reported between 2021 and 2023.

The High Administrative Court took the view that free legal aid under the LITP covers only the drafting of the lawsuit and the hearing, and not the preparation of any further submissions which are sometimes needed, which also means that for such legal actions attorneys are not reimbursed.[50]

In 2023, according to information provided by attorney at law, there were no problems with payments for free legal aid. However, the court still only approves the cost of drafting the lawsuit and the presence of an attorney at the hearing. Additional submissions by attorneys, such as those following after the response to the lawsuit by the Ministry of Interior, are generally considered unnecessary by the court with the explanation that the aforementioned could have been stated in the lawsuit (which is not true, because at the time of drafting of the lawsuit, the attorney cannot know what will be the Ministry of Interior’s response to the lawsuit), or the court considers that additional submissions can be presented at the hearing (which is also not true when it comes to more extensive submissions with links to new reports on the situation in the country of origin (COI), etc., because then the hearing should take an additional 1-2 hours just to dictate it in the minutes). Therefore, although the provider of free legal aid may consider it necessary to comment on the Ministry of Interior’s response to the lawsuit or want to point to new COI reports, etc., would not do so, given that the court does not deems it necessary.[51]

Moreover, the appeal to the High Administrative Court is not covered by free legal aid under the LITP, although it is a logical next step. In addition, the Attorneys Act requires from attorneys to continue representing clients up to 30 days after the termination of the power of attorney, if there is a risk that a client may be harmed. So since there is a contradiction between the provisions of the Attorneys Act and the provisions of the LITP which regulate free legal aid, attorneys have to deal with this in a way that prevents possible harm for a client and to proceed according to the Attorneys Act, which means that they are writing and submitting appeals to the High Administrative Court, without being paid for their work.[52]

The LITP also states that the providers of free legal aid must inform the Ministry of Interior without delay of the bringing of a lawsuit before the Administrative Court and the date of delivery of the Court’s judgment. If a provider of legal assistance does not act in line with this obligation, the provider shall be deleted from the List of Providers of Free Legal assistance.[53] The Ordinance on free legal aid prescribes that the provider should be first warned in writing and then deleted for the list if he or she has not complied with this obligation.[54]

[1] Except for exclusion cases.

[2] Article 40 LITP.

[3] Information provided by the Ministry of Interior, 8 March 2024.

[4] Article 40 LITP.

[5] Article 17(9) LITP.

[6] Article 38(2) LITP.

[7] Information provided by the Ministry of Interior, 8 March 2024.

[8] Article 35(2) LITP.

[9] Article 16(2) LITP.

[10] Article 16(3) LITP.

[11] Article 17(8) LITP.

[12] Article 17(6) LITP.

[13] Article 14(3) LITP.

[14] Article 13(2) LITP.

[15] Article 35(8) LITP.

[16] Information provided by the Ministry of Interior, 8 March 2024.

[17] Article 35(6) LITP.

[18] Article 35 (10)- (13) LITP.

[19] Information provided by the Ministry of Interior, 8 March 2024.

[20] Article 14(2) LITP.

[21] Article 13 LITP.

[22] Ministry of Interior,: Decision on the allocation of funds for the implementation of the project “Interpretation and expansion of the network of interpreters in the procedure for granting international protection” , available in Croatian at: https://bit.ly/3VN3LMk.

[23] Information provided by the Ministry of Interior, 8 March 2024.

[24] Article 13 (7) LITP.

[25] Information provided by the Ministry of Interior, 8 March 2024.

[26] Ombudswoman: Report of the Ombudswoman for 2023, available in Croatian at: https://bit.ly/4crt2kR.

[27] This refers only to the average processing time at the Administrative Court of Zagreb in 2023. Waiting times may vary at other Courts. Nevertheless, in 2023, 39 out of the 42lawsuits were dealt by the Administrative Court of Zagreb.

[28] Article 32(2) LITP.

[29] Article 24(1) Law on Administrative Disputes.

[30] Council of Europe: Launch of HELP/UNHCR Course on Asylum and Human Rights for Croatian judges, available at: https://bit.ly/4eu1QUs.

[31] Article 37 paragraph 2 of the Law on Administrative Disputes prescribes that the hearing is, as a rule, held in the court building. The court can determine that the hearing be held at a distance. No appeal is allowed against this decision.

[32] Article 33 Law on Administrative Disputes.

[33] Article 74 (1) (2) Law on Administrative Disputes.

[34] Article 51(3) LITP.

[35] Article 59(3)-(6) LITP.

[36] Article 3 (5) Ordinance on free legal aid in the procedure of granting international protection.

[37] Public call in Croatian available at: https://bit.ly/3pBuqeK.

[38] See: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=hr.mup.rhprotection.

[39] Information provided by Centre for Peace Studies, 30 January 2024.

[40] Information provided by Jesuit Refugee Service, 5 February 2024.

[41] Information provided by Borders:none, 15 January 2024.

[42] Article 60(2) LITP.

[43] Article 60(1) LITP.

[44] Article 60(4) LITP.

[45] Information provided by the Ministry of Interior, 8 March 2024.

[46] Information provided by the Ministry of Interior, 8 March 2024.

[47] Information provided by Civil Rights Project Sisak, 15 February 2024.

[48] Article 60(3) LITP.

[49] Information provided by an attorney-at-law, 26 January 2021.

[50] Information provided by an attorney-at-law, 3 January 2018.

[51] Information provided by an attorney-at-law, 15 February 2024.

[52] Information provided by an attorney-at-law, 2 January 2018.

[53] Article 60(5) LITP; Article 11(8)-(9) Ordinance on free legal aid in the procedure of granting international protection.

[54] Article 11(8)-(9) Ordinance on free legal aid in the procedure of granting international protection.