All subsequent applications must go through an admissibility procedure as provided for in the law. Under the Refugee Law, the competent authority for the examination of a subsequent application is the Asylum Service.
According to the law, if an applicant submits a subsequent application or new elements or findings on their claim after a final decision was made, the competent authority does not treat these cases as a new application, but as further steps on the initial application. In relation to the admissibility of the application, the Asylum Service has to conduct a preliminary examination to assess whether the submitted information constitutes new elements or findings which the Asylum Service did not take into consideration when deciding on the initial claim. This examination used to require an interview, however, the October 2020 amendment to the Law removed this requirement and the examination is now carried out without an interview.
When the Asylum Service decides that the subsequent application or new elements or findings are admissible, it will continue with the substantive examination of these. According to the law, the decision will only be considered as a new decision if the elements increase the chances of the applicant receiving international protection, and if the competent authority is satisfied that the applicant could not submit these elements in the initial examination, and especially during the stage of a recourse to the Administrative Court under Article 146 of the Constitution, due to no fault of his or her own.
There are no specific time limits within which the Asylum Service must issue a decision on the admissibility of the subsequent application or new elements or findings, however the applicant is considered an asylum seeker during this procedure and has access to reception conditions.
Regarding the procedure to be followed, the Asylum Service has set up a procedure for the submission of subsequent applications, new elements or findings and introduced a form which applicants are required to submit. The process of examining such applications initially became timelier, however due to the rise in such applications the processing time has also increased. In early 2021, efforts were being made to reduce the backlog however this also has had an impact on the quality of decisions as cases were identified that had been rejected as inadmissible although new elements had been submitted that justifiably could not have been submitted before. Cases were also identified where the new elements would increase the chances of the applicant receiving international protection but were rejected as inadmissible. In March 2021 the IPAC issued a decision concerning the admissibility procedure followed by the Asylum Service and considered that the Asylum Service had not followed the steps prescribed by the Law, the new element was indeed new and should have been examined and that it did increase the chances of receiving protection.
According to the law, if the Asylum Service takes a negative decision after the substantial examination, an appeal can be submitted before the IPAC, which ought to examine both points of law and substance.
The subsequent application procedure is usually followed by Syrian nationals who were previously in Cyprus as their application for asylum will be treated as a subsequent application regardless of the years that have elapsed since they were last in the country, as well as Iranians, rejected asylum seekers with long-standing (mainly irregular) residence in Cyprus, Muslim born Christian converts from different national backgrounds, and persons attempting to prolong their legal stay in Cyprus.
In 2019, 535 asylum seekers lodged subsequent applications. No data is available on subsequent applications in 2020.
 Article 16Δ Refugee Law.
 Article 16Δ(2) Refugee Law.
 Article 16Δ(3)(a) Refugee Law.
 Article 16Δ(2) Refugee Law.
 Article 16Δ(3)(b)(ii) Refugee Law.
 Based on cases represented by the Cyprus Refugee Council.