Author
The regular asylum procedure is regulated by the Asylum Act, mainly by the part two of the Act – ASYLUM PROCEDURE (Article 3 to 13c and Article 16 to 21).
Based on fundamental principles of administrative procedure applicable also to the asylum procedure, the determining authority must take a decision on the asylum application in a due time and without unnecessary delays.[1] According to the Asylum Act, the determining authority must decide the asylum application within 6 months of the commencement of the procedure.[2] The moment of the commencement of the procedure is the moment when a person declares his or her intention to apply for asylum at the competent authority. The 6-month decision-making time limit can be extended repeatedly by up to 9 months.[3] The decision on extending the time limit is made by the superior of the case worker handling the case. The grounds for extending a decision-making time limit stipulated by the law are:
- the examination of an asylum application requires the assessment of complex factual or legal issues,
- a large number of applicants submitted asylum application simultaneously and it is very difficult to decide on them within six months from the commencement of the asylum procedure, or
- it is not possible to issue a decision within six months from the commencement of the asylum procedure because the applicant does not cooperate or otherwise hampers the examination of the asylum application.
If it is necessary for the proper examination of the asylum application, the decision-making time limit may be further extended by up to 3 months.[4] If the grounds for extensions are met, the total length of the asylum procedure in the first instance may be 18 months (6 months + up to 9 months extension + additional up to 3 months extension). The applicant must be informed of the extension of the time limit for examining their application in a written form. The applicant may request the determining authority to provide information about the reasons for extending the decision-making time limit and the time within which he or she can expect the decision.
As of 31 December 2025, there were 91 pending cases.[5]
Based on HRL´s experience, the statutory time limit for deciding on asylum applications is generally not extended, and the MO is capable of issuing decisions within the prescribed time limits. Delays, however, occur in cases where the MO’s decision is annulled by the courts during the appeal procedure and the case is remitted to the MO for re-examination. In such situations, a new six-month time limit for issuing a decision begins to run. The newly issued decision may again be annulled by the courts on grounds of unlawfulness. As a result, a “ping-pong” effect may arise between the MO and the administrative courts, lasting several years and leaving applicants in a prolonged state of legal uncertainty.
As an example, HRL refers to a case in which an applicant, represented by HRL, lodged their first asylum application in December 2015 and was granted international protection only in February 2023. In the meantime, the MO issued six decisions, all of which were annulled during the appeal procedure.
Prioritised examination and fast-track processing
In Slovakia, there are no legal provisions or practice by the MO to prioritise the examination of selected types of cases.
Personal interview
During the asylum procedure, there are three types of interviews, depending on the stage of the procedure.
Initial interview at the stage of lodging the asylum application
After a person declares his or her intention to apply for asylum at the competent police department, a police officer of the BBFP carries out an interview-like procedural step during which the foreigner is asked about personal data, information concerning the journey, and the reasons for applying for asylum. The shared information is officially recorded by the police officer[6] and used to complete the Declaration of Foreigner (Vyhlásenie cudzinca) form. At this stage, the police officer records only the essential elements of the applicant’s reasons for seeking asylum and the applicant is usually not required to substantiate the statements made with evidence.[7] The children applying for asylum together with their parents, are also present in the interview room during the initial interview.
Entry Interview
After lodging the asylum application, the employee designated by the MO conducts an entry interview during which the asylum applicant must provide the requested information truthfully and completely to enable the MO to decide on the application.[8] Oftentimes, the caseworker conducting the interview is not making a decision on that asylum application and the case is assigned to a different caseworker within the MO.[9] The law does not allow omitting the entry interview under any circumstances. The information provided by the applicant during the interview is recorded on an official form, the ‘Asylum Applicants Questionnaire’ (Dotazník žiadateľa o udelenie azylu). A template of the Asylum Applicants Questionnaire is an Annex II to the Asylum Act, and it contains set of pre-defined questions for the applicant that are divided into the following thematic sections:
- Applicant’s Personal Information
- Personal Information of the Applicant’s Family Members
III. Applicant´s Assets and Property Situation
- Previous Asylum Proceedings
- Identity Documents
- Residency Documents/Visas
VII. Information about the Journey
VIII. Residence in Other EU Member State
- Personal Information of the Applicant´s Family Members Living in the EU Member States
- Other Information about the Applicant
- Application for Granting Asylum in the territory of the Slovak Republic
The interviewing caseworker is not limited to the questions contained in the questionnaire and may ask any other questions relevant to deciding the case.
Supplementary Interview
The MO must conduct the supplementary interview with all asylum applicants, only with the exception that the application may be decided solely based on information provided during the entry interview. The supplementary interview may be conducted at the initiative of the MO or at the applicants´ request. The purpose of the supplementary interview is to clarify the grounds of application, resolve any inconsistencies or provide supplementary claims and evidence. The supplementary interview may be conducted repeatedly. However, based on the latest developments, most asylum applications are decided either solely based on the entry interview or after a single supplementary interview.[10] In the majority of cases, and in contrast with the entry interview, the supplementary interview is conducted by the caseworker deciding on the application.[11]
The Asylum Act provides, in Art. 6(2)(4-7) for the same rules to apply to the conduct of both the entry and the supplementary interview. For that reason, the term “interview” in the following paragraph refers to both the entry and the supplementary interview. The applicant must be informed about the date, time and location of the interview in written form and in a language he or she presumably understands. If the applicant repeatedly fails to appear at the interview without a serious reason, this may be considered a failure to cooperate with the MO and may lead to termination of the asylum procedure.[12]
At the request of the applicant, or for reasons deserving special consideration, the MO must ensure, where possible, that the interview and its interpretation are conducted by a person of the same sex as the applicant.[13] Generally, the MO satisfies such requests. Additionally, applicants may also request a caseworker of the opposite sex if they feel more comfortable.[14]
In case of an interview with a child, the interviewing caseworker must take into account the child´s age and level of intellectual and volitional maturity.[15] Children are not present during the parents’ interview. UAMs may be interviewed only in the presence of their guardian, who has the right to inform the minor about the importance of the interview and its potential consequences, and to prepare them for the interview.[16]
The law does not regulate the possibility of interviewing through video conferencing.
The length of the interview is not time-limited and, where necessary, it may be conducted over more days. This usually occurs during entry interviews with applicants who have more complex asylum claims.[17] Applicants may request a break at any point during the interview, during which they are permitted to leave the interview room.
Interpretation
The MO must hold an interview in a language that the applicant is able to understand.[18] The applicant may, where possible, request an interpreter of their same sex.[19] Generally, the determining authority satisfies such requests. In addition to an interpreter appointed to the asylum procedure by the determining authority, whose costs are covered by the authority,[20] the applicant has a right to call in an interpreter of his or her own choice.[21] In this case, the cost of interpretation is borne by the applicant.[22]
When appointing the interpreter, the determining authority chooses the certified interpreter from the List of Experts, Interpreters and Translators at the Ministry of Justice of the Slovak Republic (MoJ). Certified interpreters are obliged by law to perform interpreting personally, properly and within the prescribed time limit, efficiently and economically, and impartially.[23] In addition, the interpreter must maintain confidentiality regarding all facts and information of which he or she became aware in the course of, or in connection with, the performance of his or her duties.[24] In case:
- there is no interpreter registered for a particular language, or
- an interpreter listed in the register is unable to interpret, or
- the interpretation would involve disproportionate difficulties or costs,
the MO may also appoint an ad-hoc non-certified interpreter.[25] In such a case, the non-certified interpreter must take an oath of impartiality, professionalism, and confidentiality.[26] The exact wording of the oath is provided in the relevant law.[27]
At the beginning of the interview, the caseworker verifies with the applicant and the interpreter if they understand each other. In case the communication is not effective and fluent, the interview is terminated, and the MO must provide a new interpreter.
Generally, there are no available interpreters to/from Belarusian language. As of 8 February 2026, there was no certified interpreter with Belarussian language registered in the List of Experts, Interpreters and Translators at the MoJ. The asylum applicants from Belarus belong to the top 5 nationalities seeking international protection in Slovakia. Despite the fact that the majority of them also speak Russian fluently, in some cases, their preferred language for asylum interviews is Belarusian. However, there is a lack of Belarusian interpreters in Slovakia, and the MO is unable to satisfy their requests.
Another challenge is the quality of interpretation. Based on HRL’s experience, some interpreters overstep their role of providing impartial interpretation and instead offer a subjective assessment of the applicant’s case or provide advice on various aspects of the application. Applicants are usually reluctant to complain about the quality of interpretation because they fear it may alienate the caseworker and subsequently have a negative effect on their application. When a legal representative is present, they first notify the caseworker of the problematic interpretation. If the issue persists, the lawyer requests the termination of the interview and the replacement of the interpreter. Despite concerns about the quality of interpretation provided by certain interpreters, the MO generally continues to engage them in other cases.
Recording and report
The currently applicable national legislation does not regulate the possibility of audio or video recording the interview. According to the Act No. 69/2026 Coll. on International Protection and on Amendments and Supplements to Certain Acts (IPA),[28] which will replace the Asylum Act and implement the Pact on Asylum and Migration, all personal interviews will be audio-recorded.[29] The recording will be stored on a memory device attached to the asylum case file. Alternatively, the determining authority will make a note in the case file indicating the location of the recording.
During the interview, the interviewing caseworker records all the information provided by the applicant in an electronic verbatim transcript. The record is in the Slovak language. At the end of the interview, the record is printed out, and the applicant can make corrections or provide comments/additional information. If needed, the whole transcript is interpreted to the applicant. After the record is reviewed by the applicant, the applicant must sign every page. The caseworker, interpreter and any other persons present during the interview (legal representative, UNHCR representative, etc.) sign only the last page of the record. A signed record of the interview is filed, and the applicant may request a copy. The final review of the record substantially prolongs the overall length of the interview, which usually takes several hours. At this stage, applicants are often exhausted and may struggle to maintain full concentration. Many tend to focus solely on reviewing the information contained in the record, overlooking the need to also ensure that no information mentioned by them is missing from the document.[30] In addition, applicants are often reluctant to point out numerous additions or corrections for fear of alienating the caseworker.[31]
Appeal
First appeal
The applicant has a right to appeal a decision of the determining authority to refuse asylum by submitting an administrative appeal against the MoI. In the court proceedings, the asylum applicant acts as a claimant and the MoI as the defendant. The appeal mechanism is judicial in nature. The general rules on the administrative court proceedings are set in the Administrative Judicial Code (AJC), which also specifies rules regarding the administrative appeal in asylum, detention and administrative expulsion matters.
The administrative appeal must be filed within 30 days of the notification of the decision to refuse asylum.[32] In case of a decision on rejection of asylum application as manifestly unfounded or inadmissible or a decision on discontinuation of the asylum procedure, the administrative appeal must be filed within 20 days of the notification of such a decision. The reviewing body is either the Administrative Court in Bratislava or the Administrative Court in Košice.[33] The administrative court examines the administrative appeal in asylum matters informally and is not bound by the claim points raised in the appeal when making its decision.[34] The decisive state of affairs for the administrative court is that at the time of the announcement or at the time of the issuance of their decision.[35] The administrative court must assess both the facts of the case and the points of law. Generally, administrative appeals against the decision to refuse asylum, the decision to reject an asylum application as manifestly unfounded and inadmissible have an automatic suspensive effect.[36] Administrative appeal against the decision on discontinuation of the asylum procedure does not have a suspensive effect.[37] The claimant may request the granting of the suspensive effect of the administrative appeal. Such a request must be submitted together with the administrative appeal, and the administrative court must decide on it within 15 days of its submission.[38]
Territorial Jurisdiction
The Administrative Court in Bratislava has territorial jurisdiction to review administrative appeals in asylum matters submitted by a claimant who (1) has a registered address of permanent residence, (2) engages in business activity, or (3) habitually resides in one of the following regions: (a) Bratislava Region, (b) Nitra Region, (c) Trenčín Region, and (d) Trnava Region. On the other hand, the Administrative Court in Košice has territorial jurisdiction to review administrative appeals in asylum matters submitted by a claimant who (1) has a registered address of permanent residence, (2) engages in business activity, or (3) habitually resides in (a) Banská Bystrica Region, (b) Košice Region, (c) Prešov Region, and (d) Žilina Region.[39]
Hearing
The presiding judge orders a hearing if (1) at least one of the parties to the proceedings so requests, (2) evidence is to be taken, (3) it is required by the public interest, (4) it is necessary for the examination of the case, or (5) the Act so provides. In other cases, the administrative court decides without a hearing. The asylum applicant has a right to request a hearing; however, it must be requested in the administrative appeal. The court will not take into account the later request for the scheduling of a hearing.[40]
In general, hearings in administrative court proceedings are public.[41] The public may be excluded from the entire hearing or part of it only if a public hearing would jeopardise (1) the protection of classified information, (2) sensitive information and facts protected under special regulation, or (3) an important interest of a party to the proceedings or of a witness.[42] The judgments must, in all cases, be pronounced publicly.[43] The courts must publish their decisions in anonymised form at the MoJ within 15 working days after the decision has become final.[44]
The administrative court must decide on the administrative appeal in asylum matters within 90 days from its submission.[45] If the administrative court finds the appeal to be well-founded, it issues a judgment on annulment of the decision of the MO. The MO must decide the application again. The same 6-month time limit for issuing a decision with a possible extension of a maximum of 12 months applies. The MO is bound by the legal opinion of the administrative court expressed in the annulment judgment.[46] If the determining authority does not act in accordance with the court´s legal opinion, it may impose a fine on the determining authority.[47]
Onward appeal
Judgments of the administrative courts may be reviewed by the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic, acting as a court of cassation. A cassation complaint may be filed by the party to the proceedings if the administrative court ruled against them.[48] This means that an asylum applicant may file a cassation complaint against a judgment of the administrative court that dismissed his or her administrative complaint. The MoI may also submit a cassation complaint if it disagrees with an annulment judgment of the administrative court. Filing of a cassation complaint by the MoI is rather exceptional.[49]
A cassation complaint must be filed within one month of the notification of the administrative court´s decision.[50] Generally, a cassation complaint does not have an automatic suspensive effect, with the exception of a cassation complaint in matters of detention and administrative expulsion.[51] A suspensive effect may be granted upon the claimant´s request.[52] The cassation court examines only points of law.[53] The decisive state of affairs for the cassation court is that at the time of the issuance of the contested decision of the administrative court.[54] The cassation court must render its decision in asylum matters within 60 days.[55]
In general, the cassation court decides without a hearing. Hearing is ordered only if the court deems it necessary.[56] If the cassation court finds the cassation appeal well-founded, it may either annul the decision of the administrative court and return the case to the court for further judicial proceedings or annul the decision of the determining authority and return the case to that authority for further administrative proceedings.[57]
The decisions of the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic are published on the website of the MOJ and on the court´s website.[58]
The quality of administrative court decisions in asylum cases largely depends on the judge to whom the case is assigned.
Constitutional complaint
An asylum applicant may also file a constitutional complaint if he or she claims that his or her fundamental rights and freedoms have been violated by a final decision, measure, or other intervention. A constitutional complaint must be filed with the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic within two months from the date on which the decision became final, the measure was notified, or the person was informed of another intervention. The law does not establish a time limit within which the Constitutional Court must render its decision.
The decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic are published on the court´s website.
Legal assistance
Legal assistance at first instance
According to Article 17a(1) of the Asylum Act, an asylum applicant may be legally represented in the regular procedure by:
- an attorney
- any natural person with the full capacity for legal acts
- The Centre of Legal Aid
- NGO providing legal aid to foreigners. There is no accreditation procedure. In practice, the provision of legal aid to foreigners must be provided in the organisation´s statutes. An employee or a member of the NGO acting on behalf of the organisation must hold a master´s degree in law; however, no specific training is required.
The applicant may choose to have only one legal representative in the asylum procedure.
Power of attorney must be granted in writing. The law does not require notarisation of the signatures.
A legal representative may be present with the applicant during lodging the asylum application and all interviews, may submit evidence on behalf of the applicant and country of origin information, have access to the applicant´s case file, and may provide a statement before issuing a decision.
Free legal assistance and/or legal representation for asylum seekers in the first instance procedure is not guaranteed by the national legislation, with the exception of UAMs. The new IPA, implementing the Pact on Asylum and Migration, does not envisage an extension of the right to free legal representation for all asylum applicants at first instance. The right to free legal counselling pursuant to Article 16(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1348 (APR) (bezplatné právne poradenstvo) is guaranteed under Article 11 of the IPA. The IPA provides that free legal counselling may also be delivered in group settings and through audio-visual technical means.
On 1 July 2025, the amendment to the Act No. 327/2005 Coll. on Granting of Legal Aid to Persons in Material Hardship (Act on Legal Aid) entered into force, which provides for legal aid to UAMs during the whole duration of asylum proceedings, including the first instance and appeal stage.[59] Free legal aid is provided to UAMs by the lawyers of the Centre for Legal Aid, which is a state budgetary organisation established by the MoJ and financed through the state budget. Legal aid by the Centre for Legal Aid is granted to UAMs upon their request or a request submitted in their name by their guardian appointed by the court, and only in case they are not legally represented in the asylum procedure by another representative. Neither the merits test nor the means test is applied.
Free legal assistance at first instance is provided to asylum seekers by NGOs, mainly the HRL and SHC, which are funded through projects under UNHCR, EU and other sources.
Since 2005, HRL has been providing legal aid and legal representation to asylum seekers in person (at the HRL´s premises in Bratislava and Košice and directly in the asylum facilities) and online (via phone, email, messengers and video conferencing platforms). HRL has been an implementing partner of UNHCR since 2022, which has been the main source of funding for legal assistance to asylum seekers. Due to UNHCR´s budget cuts, the HRL remained the sole implementing partner in 2026. Availability of the HRL´s legal assistance heavily depends on available funds. Due to significant budget cuts in 2025 connected to geopolitical developments (Trump´s administration) and changes in the national political landscape (new government in October 2023 and its hostility towards NGOs), HRL was unable to provide legal assistance to all asylum seekers who requested it. In such cases, the asylum seekers were referred to SHC, Centre for Legal Aid or paid legal aid provided by attorneys. In 2025, legal aid was provided by two HRL asylum lawyers to a total of 71 asylum seekers. Legal representation was provided to 29 asylum seekers in the first instance and the appeal procedure before the administrative courts. Out of these cases, 11 applicants were granted asylum. In addition, HRL was successful in three cases before the administrative courts, where negative first-instance decisions were overturned, thereby securing renewed protection prospects for the applicants.
The SHC is the only NGO that is present in the asylum facilities of the MO (the Humenné Reception Centre and accommodation centres in Rohovce and Opatovská Nová Ves).
In addition, the asylum applicant may choose paid legal assistance from an attorney. On the website of the Slovak Bar Association, there is a publicly available list of all attorneys which can be filtered by the specialisation, including the specialisation asylum/refugee/migration law. In practice, only a few asylum seekers can afford paid legal aid. Pro bono legal aid in asylum cases is also not common, mainly due to the limited experience of attorneys with refugee law and additional costs connected to interpretation and travelling to asylum facilities that are not located in the main regional cities.
Legal assistance on appeal
In the in asylum matters at the administrative courts (appeal procedure), asylum applicants may be represented by:
- an attorney,
- the Centre for Legal Aid
- NGOs providing legal aid to foreigners.[60]
There is, however, no mandatory legal representation in asylum matters at administrative courts, and asylum applicants may submit the administrative appeal by themselves.[61] The same is applicable for onward appeal at the cassation court.
There is no procedure for the accreditation of NGOs providing legal aid to foreigners. In practice, the provision of legal aid to foreigners must be provided in the organisation´s statutes. An employee or a member of the NGO acting on behalf of the organisation must hold a master´s degree in law; however, no specific training is required.[62]
Despite the possibility for asylum applicants to file an appeal without legal representation, it is not recommended due to the complexity of judicial proceedings and relatively low chances for succeeding. HRL is aware of cases in which the applicants prepared and filed the appeal by using generative AI.
Free legal assistance to asylum applicants in the appeal procedure is guaranteed by the Act on Legal Aid and is provided by the lawyers of the Centre for Legal Aid. Free legal assistance is granted if the asylum applicant meets the following conditions:
- the asylum applicant requested a provision of legal aid in an asylum matter
- the determining authority issued a decision (a) to refuse asylum or subsidiary protection, (b) to reject the application as inadmissible, (c) to reject the application as manifestly unfounded or (d) to transfer the applicant to another State,
- the asylum applicant is in a state of material hardship (means test)
- the case is not obviously unsuccessful (merits test).[63]
The means test applies only to asylum applicants who had a valid residence permit in Slovakia immediately prior to the issuance of the decision of the determining authority.[64]
During the merits test, the Centre for Legal Aid primarily assesses whether the time limit for appealing has lapsed, whether the asylum application is based solely on economic grounds, and, in the case of a subsequent application, whether there has been any substantial change in the facts.[65]
Additionally, legal assistance by the Centre for Legal Aid may also be granted to recognised beneficiaries of international protection in an appeal procedure against the decision:
- to withdraw asylum,
- not to prolong the subsidiary protection,
- to withdraw subsidiary protection, and
- to reject the application for temporary protection, and
- to withdraw temporary protection.
In case the administrative courts annul the decision of the MO in the appeal procedure, the provision of legal assistance by the Centre for Legal Aid continues also in the subsequent administrative (first instance) procedure at the MO.[66]
Provisions of legal assistance in asylum matters is only one of many agendas that is under the competence of the Centre for Legal Aid. From a long-term perspective, there is only a very limited number of lawyers that specialises on the asylum law. Based on HRL’s experience, the quality of legal aid provided by the Centre for Legal Aid differs significantly among individual offices across Slovakia.
The NGOs, mainly HRL and SHC, providing legal assistance to asylum seekers in the appeal procedure, face similar challenges as described in the above section on legal assistance in the first instance. In addition, the NGOs providing legal aid to foreigners cannot claim the litigation costs in court.
[1] Article 3(4) of the APC.
[2] Article 20(1) of the Asylum Act.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] The Response of the MO to a request for information submitted on 11 March 2026.
[6] Article 17(1) of the Police Corps Act.
[7] Based on HRL´s experience.
[8] Article 4(1) of the Asylum Act.
[9] Based on HRL´s experience.
[10] Based on HRL´s experience.
[11] Based on HRL´s experience.
[12] Article 19(1)(i) of the Asylum Act.
[13] Article 6(4) of the Asylum Act.
[14] According to the HRL´s experience.
[15] Article 6(5) of the Asylum Act.
[16] Article 6(6) of the Asylum Act.
[17] According to the HRL´s experience.
[18] Article 6(2) of the Asylum Act.
[19] Article 6(4) of the Asylum Act.
[20] Article 50(c) of the Asylum Act.
[21] Article 18(2) of the Asylum Act.
[22] Ibid.
[23] Article 22 of the Act No. 382/2004 Coll.
[24] Article 13(1) of the Act No. 382/2004 Coll.
[25] Article 15(1) of the Act No. 382/2004 Coll.
[26] Article 15(2) of the Act No. 382/2004 Coll.
[27] Article 5(7) of the Act No. 382/2004 Coll.
[28] The IPA will come into force on 12 June 2026.
[29] Article 12(6) of the IPA.
[30] Observation by the HRL.
[31] Observation by the HRL.
[32] Article 21(1) of the AJC.
[33] Article 17 of the AJC.
[34] Article 206 of the AJC.
[35] Article 206(4) of the AJC.
[36] Article 213(1) of the AJC.
[37] Article 19(4) of the Asylum Act.
[38] Article 213(2) of the AJC.
[39] Article 13(3) and Article 17 of the AJC.
[40] Article 182(1)(g) of the AJC.
[41] Article 109(1) of the AJC.
[42] Article 110(1) of the AJC.
[43] Article 5(4) of the AJC.
[44] Article 82a of the Act No. 757/2004 Coll.
[45] Article 216(1) of the AJC.
[46] Article 191(6) of the AJC.
[47] Ibid.
[48] Article 442(1) of the AJC.
[49] Based on HRL´s experience.
[50] Article 443(1) of the AJC.
[51] Article 446 of the AJC.
[52] Article 447 of the AJC.
[53] Article 440 of the AJC.
[54] Article 454 of the AJC.
[55] Article 458 of the AJC.
[56] Article 455 of the AJC.
[57] Article 463 of the AJC.
[59] Article 24a(3) of the Act on Legal Aid.
[60] Article 50(2) of the AJC.
[61] Article 49(2)(b) of the AJC.
[62] Article 50(2) AJC.
[63] Article 24a(1) of the Act on Legal Aid.
[64] Article 24b(4) of the Act on Legal Aid.
[65] Article 24a(2) of the Act on Legal Aid.
[66] Article 24b(6) of the Act on Legal Aid.