Author
The NDGAP opened a status-review procedure in 273 cases in 2024 (breakdown of the five main nationalities: 129 Afghans, 49 Syrians, 45 Iraqi, 13 Iranians, 5 Palestine) and issued a decision on termination/revocation in zero case.[1]
In the last years, the HHC experienced many cases where Afghan beneficiaries of subsidiary protection did not have their status renewed after 3 years because the asylum authority considered their return to Afghanistan safe. The HHC had no such case in 2024. In these cases, the authority systematically established either the city of Kabul or the province of Balkh as an internal protection alternative for Afghans whose region of origin is struggling with instability, despite the deteriorating situation in both destinations reported by different sources and the lack of family links or sufficient means of subsistence. The problem regarding Kabul as an internal protection alternative (IPA) persisted in 2020, as well as Damascus as an IPA which was applied regarding Syrians with subsidiary protection. Until August 2021, there were still cases where the NDGAP indicated Kabul as an IPA for the person concerned. However, since the seizure of power by the Taliban in August 2021, the HHC is not aware of any decision where the NDGAP would have expelled anyone to Afghanistan as a result of the withdrawal proceeding. On the contrary, even persons who had previously been expelled were granted humanitarian status on account of the general situation in Afghanistan. As to Syrian citizens, Damascus remained to be applied by the NDGAP as an IPA throughout 2022 and 2023. The HHC had no such case in 2024.
The HHC is also aware of the case of a Pakistani man whose status review procedure was initiated for the fourth time in four years. The applicant has been living in Hungary since 2013 as a beneficiary of subsidiary protection. He had a successful status review procedure in 2018 and 2019. In 2020, however, a new one was initiated resulting in status withdrawal with reference to classified data. This decision was successfully challenged before the court and the NDGAP eventually had to leave the applicant’s status intact. In 2021, a new status review procedure was initiated against him. As a result, the authority withdrew his status for the 2nd time, again with reference to classified data and the credibility of the applicant, but the decision was challenged before the court. In its judgment of May 2022, the court, having looked into the classified data files, found that the applicant was credible and quashed the asylum authority’s withdrawing decision accordingly. It is worth noting that the applicant won a case against Hungary before the ECtHR, regarding his unlawful detention during his asylum procedure.[2]
Termination/revocation of the protection status based on national security grounds, due to serious crime committed by the beneficiary or due to re-availment of the protection of the country of origin of the beneficiary
Since the difference between the status review and withdrawal procedure is essentially a difference of terminology, but not of substance in terms of content and outcome, please refer to points 7.1, 7.2, 7.3. below.
[1] Information provided by NDGAP on 19 February 2025.
[2] ECtHR, M.K. v. Hungary, App no. 46783/14.