Author
Overall conditions
The Public Defender of Rights, acting in its capacity as the National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) under OPCAT, carried out unannounced monitoring visits to the reception facilities Rohovce and Opatovská Nová Ves in February 2025.[1] Both facilities are operated by the MO and accommodate asylum applicants as well as other categories of foreign nationals, including persons granted temporary protection. At the time of the visits, occupancy levels were relatively low compared to the overall capacity of 140 places per facility. Rohovce is primarily used for single adult men, whereas Opatovská Nová Ves accommodates mainly families with children and other vulnerable persons.
Material reception conditions were generally assessed as adequate. Facilities appeared calm and spacious, with access to outdoor areas, shared kitchens, laundry rooms, and storage facilities. Residents had access to lockable storage for personal belongings. Bathrooms provided a degree of privacy through partitioned shower spaces. However, certain shortcomings were identified, particularly in Opatovská Nová Ves, including insufficient room size for larger families, damaged furniture in common areas, and missing equipment such as blinds or insect screens. The monitoring body recommended taking family needs into account when allocating accommodation and improving infrastructure during future renovations.
Nevertheless, some residents in Opatovská Nová Ves reported insufficient awareness of available activities and expressed a need for more organised group activities, particularly for children. The monitoring body identified physical separation between accommodation areas and staff offices as a possible factor affecting communication and recommended more proactive outreach by staff within residential areas.
Leisure and daily activities are organised with the support of cultural mediators and social workers. Activities include social events, language courses, sports opportunities, and, in some cases, participation in local community initiatives such as sports clubs. Children accommodated in Opatovská Nová Ves attend school in a nearby municipality and may receive additional language support. Residents may also participate in maintenance work within the facilities and receive small remuneration. Nevertheless, some residents in Opatovská Nová Ves reported insufficient awareness of available activities and expressed a need for more organised group activities, particularly for children. The monitoring body identified physical separation between accommodation areas and staff offices as a possible factor affecting communication and recommended more proactive outreach by staff within residential areas.
Food is provided three times daily in both facilities, with the possibility for residents to cook independently using their own supplies. While satisfaction with catering improved in Rohovce after a change of provider, residents in Opatovská Nová Ves reported dissatisfaction with the quality and diversity of food, including insufficient fruit, vegetables, and dairy products, particularly for children. The monitoring body recommended improvements in dietary diversity.
Clothing and hygiene items are distributed periodically, supplemented by donations and project funding managed by NGOs. While basic needs are generally met, some residents raised concerns regarding the limited quantity and choice of hygiene products. The monitoring body recommended ensuring sufficient supplies for persons with higher needs.
Healthcare is provided at a basic level, with visiting medical staff and referral to external specialists where necessary. In Rohovce, a doctor attends weekly and a health assistant is present several times per week, while in Opatovská Nová Ves a nurse attends twice per week. Residents may be accompanied to local healthcare providers when needed, including specialist and psychiatric services. The monitoring body concluded that access to healthcare and medication was generally ensured, including for persons without financial resources.
Psychological support is available in both facilities but with important differences. In Opatovská Nová Ves, psychological services are provided during working hours on weekdays. In Rohovce, however, psychological services are limited to approximately once per week due to staffing constraints, despite evidence of significant mental health needs among residents. The monitoring body therefore recommended strengthening psychological staffing, ideally through the recruitment of a full-time psychologist.
The monitoring also examined mechanisms for identifying vulnerable persons. Initial screening primarily takes place in the reception centre Humenné, with information recorded in an internal database accessible to staff across facilities. A structured “social profile” tool is used to document vulnerabilities and guide interventions. Nevertheless, the monitoring body recommended further staff training, particularly in line with the Istanbul Protocol, to improve identification of victims of torture and trauma.
The MO provided a written response to the recommendations issued by the Public Defender of Rights following the monitoring visits to the reception centres in Rohovce and Opatovská Nová Ves in February 2025.[2] The authorities generally acknowledged the identified issues and expressed willingness to implement several measures, while also pointing to structural or legislative constraints affecting certain recommendations.
Concerning vulnerability identification and staff training, the MO stated that employees of reception facilities regularly participate in training activities organised by UNHCR, IOM and the European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA), including modules related to vulnerability. Additional regional training activities were planned for the near future.
In response to the recommendation to strengthen psychological support in Rohovce, the MO reported that it had contacted the SHC, acting as an implementing partner under an AMIF-funded project, with the aim of ensuring the presence of a full-time psychologist in the facility.
Regarding accommodation conditions in Opatovská Nová Ves, the authorities indicated that efforts are made within existing capacity constraints to take into account the needs of families when allocating rooms. Planned renovations include structural adjustments to create larger rooms suitable for families, as well as the installation of blinds and insect screens, while improvements of common areas would depend on available financial resources.
With respect to communication with residents and organisation of leisure activities, staff and cultural mediators were instructed to regularly display information about activities on notice boards and to proactively engage residents in available programmes.
Finally, concerning nutrition, the MO reported cooperation with the SHC within a national food redistribution project aimed at increasing the provision of fruit, vegetables and dairy products in asylum facilities.
Prosecutorial supervision in asylum facilities and integration centres is governed by an internal regulation of the General Prosecutor’s Office adopted in May 2023[3]. Under this framework, competent prosecutors are required to verify whether the authorities managing asylum facilities comply with applicable legislation, including respect for the rights of foreign nationals, protection of vulnerable persons, and lawful conduct of asylum procedures. Supervision also covers procedural aspects such as the timely delivery of decisions, access to information in a language understood by the person concerned, handling of complaints submitted by residents, and compliance of administrative measures with legal requirements.
Prosecutorial inspections are to be carried out regularly, at least once every six months, as well as on an ad hoc basis where necessary, including in response to complaints, information obtained from the media, or other relevant findings. During inspections, prosecutors examine documentation, including case files of the MO related to asylum proceedings of persons accommodated in the facilities, as well as the legality of decisions concerning accommodation arrangements, including permissions for residence outside accommodation centres.
Where violations of law are identified, prosecutors are required to adopt appropriate measures under the Act on Prosecution, including initiating corrective actions, notifying competent authorities, or, where relevant, initiating judicial proceedings or lodging protests against unlawful decisions. The regulation also establishes obligations to report serious incidents occurring in asylum facilities, such as injuries, allegations of ill-treatment, escapes, or violent incidents involving residents.
A relevant judgment concerning the reception conditions was issued by the Administrative Court in Košice on 25 November 2024.[4] The case concerned an asylum applicant who had been accommodated in a reception facility and was subsequently detained on the grounds of alleged threats to public order following incidents in the accommodation centre. The court annulled the detention decision and ordered the applicant’s immediate release.
The case arose after the MO reported escalating conflicts involving the applicant in the reception facility, including allegations of aggressive behaviour. The police authorities relied primarily on documentation provided by the reception facility and NGO staff when ordering detention. A significant part of the documentation submitted by the management of the reception facility consisted of official records relating to the applicant’s complaints about material conditions in the centre, which were subsequently used as supporting evidence in the detention proceedings.
However, the court found substantial deficiencies in the reasoning of the detention decision, including the absence of a proper evaluation of evidence and insufficient justification of the necessity of detention. These shortcomings rendered the decision unreviewable and therefore unlawful.
The judgment also addressed the relationship between disciplinary measures within the reception system and detention. The applicant argued that, under the Reception Conditions Directive, violations of internal rules in reception centres may justify only measures such as restriction or withdrawal of material reception conditions, rather than deprivation of liberty. The court accepted the relevance of this argument in principle and criticised the authorities for failing to consider less severe measures available within the reception system before resorting to detention. In particular, the court noted that the MO has the power to impose sanctions for breaches of internal rules and that alternative measures – such as transfer to another reception facility or adjustment of internal regime – had not been properly examined.
Activities in the centres
Activities and leisure opportunities are available in asylum reception centres. Asylum seekers may move freely within the premises of the reception facility and have access to common rooms, outdoor recreational areas, playgrounds and spaces designated for sports and exercise. Additional educational, social and leisure activities may also be organised by non-governmental organisations operating in the facilities, depending on available funding and project activities. These activities are available to both adults and children and may include language courses, workshops, recreational events and other integration-oriented activities.
Information on the number of staff employed in asylum reception centres is not publicly available. However, based on testimonies collected by the HRL from asylum seekers residing in the facilities, staffing levels generally appear to be sufficient to ensure the day-to-day functioning of the centres and the provision of basic services. According to the Asylum Act, persons working with foreign nationals in asylum facilities are required to receive appropriate training and, where necessary, refresher training, particularly with regard to the needs of vulnerable persons.[5] However, no information is publicly available on the frequency, content or practical implementation of such training programmes.
Length of stay
Accommodation in asylum reception facilities is directly linked to the status of an applicant for international protection. As long as a person retains the status of an asylum seeker, regardless of the stage of the asylum procedure, he or she is entitled to reside in and receive accommodation in the asylum reception system. This entitlement ceases immediately once the person loses asylum seeker status. This may occur either because international protection has been granted or because all available remedies against a negative asylum decision have been exhausted, including the dismissal of a cassation appeal. In such cases, individuals are required to leave the reception facility without delay.
Information on the average length of stay of asylum seekers in reception facilities in Slovakia is not publicly available.
[1] Public Defender of Rights, Pobytové tábory: Rohovce a Opatovská Nová Ves – Správa z monitoringu národného preventívneho mechanizmu, 17 June 2025, available (in Slovak) here.
[2] The response is available here.
[3] Instruction of the Prosecutor General of the Slovak Republic No. 5/2023 of 26 May 2023 on the procedure of prosecutors in the supervision of compliance with legality in asylum facilities and integration centres
[4] Administrative court in Košice, 9Saz/4/2024, 25 November 2024, available (in Slovak) here.
[5] Article 39(4) of the Asylum Act.