Author
While the asylum application can be presented (‘made’) either to AIMA or to any other police authority, the responsibility to register asylum claims lies solely with AIMA.[1] If an asylum application is presented to a different police authority, it must be referred to AIMA within 48 hours.[2]
The responsibility for organising asylum files (including registration) lies with AIMA’s National Centre for Asylum and Refugees (AIMA-CNAR).[3] AIMA-CNAR is required to inform CPR, as an organisation working on UNHCR’s behalf, of the registration of individual asylum applications.
According to the information provided by AIMA, in 2024, the Portuguese authorities registered a total of 2,680 applications for international protection (including 46 made by persons relocated to Portugal). CPR received 2,273 communications throughout the year.[4]
In accordance with the law, applications for international protection must be presented to AIMA or to any other police authority as soon as possible, but the timeframe for doing so is not specified.[5]
While there are no specific time limits for asylum applicants to lodge their application, the law provides for use of the Accelerated Procedure in case the asylum applicant enters or remains irregularly on national territory and fails to apply for asylum as soon as possible without a valid reason.[6] Before AIMA took office, this legal provision was rarely used by the then competent authority. However, throughout 2024, AIMA regularly applied this provision, albeit, according to the experience of CPR, when applied, it is usually combined with other grounds for the application of accelerated procedures.
Failure to apply for asylum at the earliest possible time, unless the applicant can demonstrate good reason for not having done so, also constitutes a ground for not granting the benefit of the doubt.[7] According to CPR’s observation, this provision has been applied in practice.
Persons refused entry at the border are liable to immediate removal to the point of departure,[8] meaning that, in practice, they are required to present their asylum application immediately.
Upon presentation of the application, the asylum applicant is required to fill out a preliminary form, which includes information on identification, itinerary and date of entry into Portugal, grounds of the asylum application, supporting evidence, and witnesses. The form is available in Portuguese, English, French, and Spanish. According to AIMA, first-line officers help applicants at this stage and interpretation is provided both for filling out the form and for any communication with AIMA’s officers. According to CPR’s experience, asylum applicants are not systematically provided with quality interpretation services at this stage of the procedure, which may result in the collection of insufficient and low-quality information.[9]
Since December 2019, following an agreement between SEF and CPR, two CPR liaison officers were deployed to the premises of /AIMA-CNAR, where the majority of applications are made, inter alia, to facilitate registration, provide information to applicants, and to perform the necessary referrals (e.g. for housing). While according to CPR’s observation, this measure has facilitated communication between the relevant entities and the provision of support to asylum applicants, it came to an end in January 2024 following a decision made by AIMA.
AIMA is required to register the asylum application within 3 working days of presentation and to issue the applicant with a certificate of asylum application within 3 days of registration.[10]
During SEF’s tenure, despite isolated delays (e.g. related to the registration of asylum applications presented in SEF’s regional branches), CPR did not encounter systemic or serious problems regarding the registration of applications as opposed to occasional delays in the renewal of documents (usually linked to difficulties in making appointments with SEF).[11]
Since the beginning of AIMA’s operation, CPR has observed/received reports of concerning practices pertaining to the registration of asylum applications, namely:
- Applicants being incorrectly informed that applications for international protection could only be made by persons displaced from Ukraine;
- Individuals reporting having to make multiple attempts in order for their application to be registered by the authorities;
- Refusals to register applications due to lack of personnel;
- Introduction of a ticketing system at CNAR’s premises according to which a ticket was required to apply for asylum. Following the distribution of 20 tickets per day no further applications were allowed;
- Applicants forced to travel across the country to Lisbon in order to present/register an application in CNAR, after being refused in other AIMA’s premises with the exception of Porto and Coimbra;
- Applicants being incorrectly informed of the need to schedule an appointment in order to present an application for international protection in AIMA’s premises other than CNAR;
- Lack of registration by AIMA of asylum applications presented at police authorities’ premises;
- Lack of issuance or renewal of a certificate of asylum application in AIMA’s premises other than CNAR;
- Late registration of applications made by individuals in administrative detention (up to several days), compounded by the fact that, upon registration, the authorities recorded the date of registration as the date of the application instead of referring to the date when the asylum applicant effectively applied for international protection.
In a response to Parliament in March 2025,[12] the Government stated that applications for international protection can be presented to any police authority or any AIMA front desk service, but that temporarily the presentation of applications had been concentrated at CNAR in Lisbon and AIMA front desk services in Porto and Coimbra.[13] It added that (1) any citizen who expressed a will to apply for international protection is given the opportunity to do so, (2) that all AIMA front desks are able to receive applications and (3) that applications are registered immediately.
The Government did not clarify for how long the presentation of applications for international protection were concentrated in Lisbon, Porto and Coimbra, nor the reasons for this limitation, and how it was overcome and the remaining AIMA front desk services were able to register applications for international protection.
According to CPR’s observation, the impossibility of presenting/registering applications for international protection and obtaining information on cases outside CNAR in Lisbon and AIMA front desk services in Porto and Coimbra lasted throughout 2024 and 2025, and the organisation repeatedly contacted AIMA about this significant limitation in the context of providing legal support to applicants.[14]
In providing information to the AIDA report, AIMA admitted that throughout 2024 there were constraints in registering asylum applications outside of Lisbon. According to AIMA, with the exception of Lisbon, Porto and Coimbra, the other AIMA front desk services did not have staff trained to receive and register applications, nor to analyse them. The Agency admitted that, due to this limitation, there have been cases reported in which applicants were unable to present and/or register asylum applications, but which were later dealt with. AIMA also noteed that, in 2024, front desk services in Porto and Coimbra were understaffed compared to Lisbon, which also hindered the presentation and registration of applications.[15]
CPR is also aware of instances in 2024 where asylum applicants were urged by AIMA officials to withdraw their applications for international protection without having access to legal information/assistance and based on wrongful information. This includes incorrect information such as the suggestion/advice that only applications related to political matters or problems with the authorities are accepted; wrongful assumptions regarding the situation in the country of origin; and the provision of incorrect and/or incomplete information regarding other avenues for regular stay and corresponding reception conditions. Importantly, such cases concerned particularly vulnerable applicants. CPR required clarifications regarding this practice and assisted the concerned applicants in requesting reversal of the withdrawal. While no specific feedback was received by the organisation, CPR is aware that the asylum applications concerned were reinstated by the authorities.
A decision from the Central Administrative Court South (TCA South) issued in 2021 considered that applications for international protection presented remotely may not be altogether disregarded by SEF. In the case analysed, the application had been initially filed by a lawyer representing the applicant via fax, and was not taken into account by SEF, which demanded it be made in person in order for the necessary checks to be performed (namely because it was not possible to confirm whether the applicant was indeed in Portugal at the time of application).[16] According to AIMA, the Agency acknowledges the importance of accepting remote asylum applications, particularly in situations where the applicant cannot be physically present at the time. The Agency accepts the application, but notifies the applicant to report to the services as soon as possible to formalise and complete the application, in particular to collect biometric data.
In 2020, the UN Human Rights Committee highlighted that Portugal should ‘[e]nsure that all applications for international protection at the border and in reception and detention facilities are promptly received, registered and referred to the asylum authorities’ and ‘[c]ontinue its efforts to maintain and strengthen the quality of its refugee status determination procedures, in order to fairly and efficiently identify and recognise those in need of international protection and to afford sufficient guarantees of respect for the principle of non-refoulement under the Covenant’.[17] The Committee further recommended that Portugal strengthens ‘[…] training for the staff of migration institutions and border personnel on the rights of asylum seekers and refugees under the Covenant and other international standards’.[18]
A study focusing on the situation of asylum-seeking unaccompanied children and ageing out in Portugal published in 2021 revealed that the majority of those questioned stated that they were not aware of the possibility of applying for international protection upon arrival in the country, and that they had been informed of it by the national authorities in light of their situation.[19]
[1] Article 13(1) and (7) Asylum Act.
[2] Article 13(2) Asylum Act.
[3] Article 17 Decree-Law 252/2000.
[4] As of 17/02/2025. Please note that statistics included in this report from CPR refer to the total number of applications communicated to the organisation in accordance with the communication duties established in the Asylum Act.
[5] Article 13(1) Asylum Act.
[6] Article 19(1)(d) Asylum Act.
[7] Article 18(4)(d) Asylum Act.
[8] Article 41(1) Immigration Act.
[9] In the context of the right of reply of the authorities to the 2024 draft AIDA report (22 August 2025), AIMA affirms that throughout the asylum procedure applicants are consistently asked to indicate the language they communicate and/or understand, so as to ensure that proceedings are conducted in that language. CPR maintains that it has identified worrying practices pertaining to inappropriate language/absence of interpretation in 2024, particularly in the first half of the year, which is consistent with a time when applications were being subject to ‘temporarily accelerated procedures’, as conceded by the Agency, and at a time when interviews were conducted in the same day of the presentation of the asylum application. As stated, this concern was not only expressed by CPR. Cases identified by CPR were consistently reported by the organisation to AIMA.
[10] Articles 13(7) and 14(1) Asylum Act.
[11] Appointments were generally made through a phone line that was often quite difficult to reach.
[12] Assembleia da República, Pergunta 1034/XVI/1, Acesso ao sistema de asilo, February 2025, available here.
[13] Assembleia da República, Resposta à Pergunta 1034/XVI/1, Acesso ao sistema de asilo, March 2025, available here.
[14] According to CPR’s observation, in July 2025 this impossibility had not been entirely overcome.
[15] According to AIMA, the constraints on submitting and registering applications for international protection are being progressively overcome in 2025 by hiring more staff for the CNAR in Lisbon and Porto, and training other AIMA staff throughout the country.
[16] TCA South, Decision 107/21.0BELLE, 18 August 2021, available here.
[17] Human Rights Committee, Concluding Observations on the fifth periodic report of Portugal, CCPR/C/PRT/CO/5. 28 April 2020, par.35(a) and (b), available here.
[18] Ibid, par.35(f).
[19] Sandra Roberto, Carla Moleiro, ed. Observatório das Migrações, De menor a maior: acolhimento e autonomia de vida em menores não acompanhados, April 2021, available here, 50.