Author
Categories of people considered to be vulnerable are similar to those listed in Article 21 of the recast Reception Conditions Directive, the only difference being that the IPA definition does not explicitly include persons with serious illness, although the definition is open to categories not listed.[1]
Screening of vulnerability
According to the law, vulnerability is assessed during a medical examination, which is conducted before the lodging of the asylum application.[2] Vulnerability can also be identified during the lodging of the application or at any later time during the asylum procedure.[3]
In practice, physical vulnerability is assessed during the medical examination.[4] In order to ensure that proper support is given to vulnerable asylum applicants, the Migration directorate and the UOIM have to share information regarding the existence and nature of identified special needs of asylum applicants.[5] During the lodging of the application, the Migration directorate states the detected vulnerability or identified special needs of the applicant on a form that is later sent to UOIM when the applicant is accommodated. The Migration directorate mainly collects basic information on the form such as medical needs of the applicant. The form is normally filled out during the lodging of the application and the information included in the form depends on the official of the Migration directorate. The practice is not consistent and information on vulnerability that does not require medical needs is often not added. The form is then checked by the responsible social worker of the UOIM in order to ensure that proper support regarding accommodation is provided to the applicant.
Although the vulnerability of the applicant can also be identified by the Migration directorate, during the personal interview, the above-mentioned form is not filled in. This means that the UOIM may not be aware of the detected vulnerabilities.[6]
The identification of vulnerability is therefore largely based on the applicant’s statements during the lodging of the application and the personal interview. Since no special procedure for assessing vulnerability is in place, the vulnerability assessment depends on the person’s willingness to share sensitive personal information and the capacity of officials to detect special needs. In theory, all caseworkers should be responsible for identifying vulnerable applicants and for examining their asylum claim, but as the procedure is not applied this does not happen in practice.
The Migration directorate does not collect statistics on vulnerable asylum applicants.[7] In practice, the vulnerability assessment is also not part of the final decision on asylum and vulnerability of the applicants is often not considered as a factor in the final decision. All officials receive training on conducting interviews with vulnerable applicants.[8]
If it is established that the asylum applicant is not able to participate in the asylum procedure, the Migration directorate is obliged to notify the social services.[9] Based on the recommendation of the Migration directorate and a medical examination, social services have to immediately appoint a legal guardian to the asylum applicant.[10] In practice, the Migration directorate will order an expert opinion before making the recommendation to the social services. In line with a decision of the Administrative Court, the MoI is obliged to make sure that the person acting as a party in the procedure has the legal capacity to understand the procedure. In case they do not, the applicant has to be represented by an appointed legal guardian. The procedure conducted with a person without the legal capacity to be a party in the procedure and without the representation of a legal guardian renders the decision made in the procedure unlawful.[11]
In 2025, 6 medical examinations were carried out and two asylum applicants were found to be unable to participate in the procedure independently and in need of a legal guardian.[12] Due to the position of the Migration directorate that a legal guardian can be paid only if they represent an unaccompanied minor and not if they represent an adult that is not able to independently participate in the procedure, legal guardians are not generally willing to represent such adults. In addition, legal guardians are only trained to represent unaccompanied minors, and not adults.[13]
Vulnerability can also be detected by the UOIM social workers where the applicant is accommodated. Information on detected vulnerability is not shared with the Migration directorate unless the Standard operative procedure for the prevention and action in cases of sexual and gender-based violence (SOPS)[14] is conducted and the Migration directorate attends the meeting. The information gathered in the SOPS is not automatically submitted in the asylum procedure.
In 2025, the majority of unaccompanied minors absconded before lodging the application. According to the official statistics, 3,949 minors expressed their intention for international protection in 2025. However, only 216 minors lodged the application. Out of 216, 164 were lodged by unaccompanied minors.[15] Statistics on the number of unaccompanied children who expressed the intention for asylum and are processed in the preliminary procedure is not gathered. Statistics of the number of unaccompanied children accommodated in the Asylum home or its branch before they lodge the application is also not gathered.[16] Therefore, the lack of identification and protection of unaccompanied minors continued to be a serious systematic issue in 2025. Lack of statistics on the number of unaccompanied children who are processed by the police but abscond before lodging the application hinders the possibility to thoroughly assess the scope of the issue.
Identified unaccompanied children are accommodated in Postojna, the first and only centre for unaccompanied children, that was established in April 2024, or Logatec which is less suitable for children.[17]
The issue of unidentified unaccompanied minors was also addressed by the Ombudsperson. The Police Directorate Novo mesto operates with 6 police stations and one for Compensatory Measures.[18] The Police Directorate Novo mesto processed 72% irregular crossings of the border in 2025.[19] During the visit of the police station for Compensatory Measures in 2023 the Ombudsperson noted that the Police observed that unaccompanied children often claim to be of age in order to not be separated from the group they are traveling with.[20] Altogether 725 police officers in Slovenia are trained to identify unaccompanied minors and vulnerable individuals.[21]
In 2025 the National Working Group for Combating Trafficking in Human beings prepared a two-year Action plan for combating trafficking in human beings,[22] which foresees preventative measures, detection, investigation and prosecution and a call for systemic solutions and legislative changes. In practice, applicants who are victims of trafficking in human beings are rarely identified or recognised as such. In practice, the Police does not identify asylum applicants as victims of trafficking as it is their position that the criminal act was committed before entering Slovenia therefore the victim ceased to be a victim as the criminal act has already been committed. Due to this position, traffickers are often processed for smuggling instead of trafficking while the risk of being a victim of trafficking in the future is not assessed.[23] Issues regarding the identification of victims of trafficking were also highlighted in the 2023 GRETA report[24] And the Committee against Torture during the 2023 fourth periodic review.[25] GRETA carried its fourth evaluation visit to Slovenia in December 2025.[26] Lack of effective identification of victims of trafficking was also addressed by
In 2025 Slovenia convicted traffickers for the first time in four years. The Government conducted trainings for law enforcement officials and updated the above mentioned National Action Plan. Therefore, in the 2025 Trafficking in persons report Slovenia was again upgraded on Tier 1. [27]
In order to ensure that people are informed about the dangers of human trafficking, the UOIM started a project through which special information sessions (called PATS[28]) following the asylum application should be conducted with unaccompanied children and other potential victims of trafficking. In 2025, these information sessions were conducted by Društvo Ključ[29] an NGO specialised in human trafficking. The aim of the sessions was informing potential victims of the dangers of trafficking, and to identify potential victims. Continuing to support a comprehensive national referral system and tackle trafficking was one of the recommendations made by the EUAA after the conclusion of the operation in Slovenia.[30]
If someone is identified as a victim of trafficking, the SOPs are conducted, during which a plan for further action and support is made and the victim is offered additional support. In 2025, Društvo Ključ conducted 886 individual and 349 group information sessions. In 2025 SOPs were conducted 12 times during which 15 cases were discussed.[31]
Lack of vulnerability screening is one of the biggest shortcomings of the asylum system. Since a vulnerability assessment is not conducted, vulnerability is also not taken into account in the decision.[32] In addition, there is no separate accommodation facilities for vulnerable groups (LGBTQI+, single women, single women with children) available in Slovenia. In April 2024 a separate accommodation centre for systemic accommodation of unaccompanied children was opened in Postojna. The centre has the capacity to accommodate up to 72 unaccompanied minors. During the year, 190 unaccompanied minor applicants were accommodated in the centre.[33] One of the systematic shortcomings of the asylum system is the lack of appropriate separate accommodation for unaccompanied children who are recognised as potential or identified victims of trafficking. In Slovenia accommodation for such children can be provided by so called “crisis centres” or NGOs. In practice, the national centres for “crisis accommodation” of children refuse to accommodate unaccompanied asylum-seeking children and the NGOs providing accommodation to victims of trafficking do not have appropriate accommodation for children. Therefore, unaccompanied asylum-seeking children who were identified as potential victims of trafficking were also accommodated in Postojna during 2025. As the accommodation centre in Postojna is an open centre known to the general public it does not provide safe accommodation to children who are potential victims of trafficking.
Age assessment of unaccompanied children
If doubts about the age of an unaccompanied minor arise during the examination of the application for international protection, a medical examination of the applicant can be ordered by the competent authority.[34] In the course of preparation of the opinion, the medical expert can also consult with experts of other fields.[35]
The medical examination for the purpose of age assessment can only be conducted if both the unaccompanied minor and their legal representative give their written consent. If they refuse without stating a valid reason, the applicant is considered to be an adult. However, the decision to reject their application cannot be based solely on that refusal.[36]
If after obtaining the expert opinion, a doubt still exists as to the applicant’s age, they are considered a minor.[37]
Age assessment is conducted by the Institute for Forensic medicine that is part of the Medical Faculty of the University of Ljubljana. Age assessment includes a physical examination, an MRI of the applicant’s wrists and collar bones, and a dental X-ray. Members of civil society are concerned that conducting such age assessment is unethical and unsafe. An opinion is then issued based on the results of the assessment.
In practice, due to the large cost of medical examinations and the logistical problems owing to the remote locations where MRI can be conducted, the Migration directorate only conducts age assessments in exceptional cases.[38] In 2025, identification of unaccompanied minors in mixed migration flows posed a serious systematic issue. In practice, young children would identify as adults and adults would identify as unaccompanied minors. In both cases, they would be processed by the Police based on their statements even in cases when it was evident that the statements were false.[39] Some were then identified as unaccompanied minors in the Asylum Home or its branch or during the asylum procedure (see Screening of vulnerability). In 2025, 3 age assessments procedures (MRI and dental X-ray) were conducted.[40]
In practice, doubts as to the child’s age usually arise based on the person’s appearance or when the child’s statements do not match the submitted identity documents. In case the doubt arises based on the child statements, the Migration directorate sometimes conducts an interview in order to clear the inconsistencies before ordering the age assessment. The law stipulates that age assessment can only be conducted in case there are doubts as to whether the child is underage and not in cases when there is doubt about a child claiming to be of age. [41] Therefore, in practice, adults claiming to be minors can be accommodated together with unaccompanied children until the assessment is made. Due to the lengthiness of the procedure this could happen for up to a couple of months. In addition, children claiming to be of age can be accommodated with adults since age assessment cannot be made in their case.
The applicant cannot appeal against the results of the age assessment; however, the applicant can argue issues relating to age assessment procedure in the appeal procedure against the international protection decision.
[1] Article 2(22) IPA.
[2] Article 13(1) IPA.
[3] Article 13(2) IPA.
[4] Obsevation by the PIC.
[5] Article 13 (1) Rules on the procedure for aliens who wish to apply for international protection in the Republic of Slovenia and on the procedure for accepting applications for international protection.
[6] In the context of their right of reply, the Ministry of Interior mentioned that if any specific information regarding vulnerabilities is disclosed during the personal interview, UOIM is informed in case this vulnerabilities may request special reception conditions. Based on their observance of practice, the PIC argues that while the Ministry can informally inform the UOIM, in practice this is not often done through the above-mentioned form.
[7] Official statistics provided by Migration directorate, March 2026.
[8] Official statistics provided by the Migration drectorate, March 2026.
[9] Article 13(2) Rules on the procedure for aliens who wish to apply for international protection in the Republic of Slovenia and on the procedure for accepting applications for international protection.
[10] Article 19(1)-(2) IPA.
[11] Administrative Court Decision, I U 194/2021, 6 September 2021, available in Slovenian here.
[12] Official statistics provided by the Migration drectorate, March 2026.
[13] Observation by the PIC.
[14] The SOPS protocol is available in Slovenian here.
[15] Official statistics provided by the Migration Directorate, March 2026.
[16] Information provided by the MoI and the UOIM, March 2026.
[17] Observation by the PIC.
[18] Police, List of police stations and their contacts, available here.
[19] Official police statistics, available here.
[20] National Preventive Mechanism, Priporočila iz obiskov (preglednice), available here.
[21] Official statistics provided by the Police, February 2026.
[22] Government of Slovenia, Action plan for combating trafficking in human beings for the period 2025 – 2026, 13 February 2025, available here.
[23] In the context of their right of reply (July 2025), the Ministry of Interior noted that the legal definitions and the elements of criminal offences differ between human smuggling and human trafficking. It further noted that, while the offences committed outside Slovenia are beyond Slovenia’s responsibility, the Slovenian Police gather such information to provide it to the law enforcement authorities of respective countries (including to EUROPOL) and cooperate with them according to the legal provision of international cooperation in criminal matters. Finally, it noted that, based on the published manual on the identification, assistance and protection of victims of human trafficking, adopted by the Interdepartmental Working Group for Combating Human Trafficking (Resolution of the Government of the Republic of Slovenia No. 02402-2/2016/5 of 5.5.2023), it is necessary to follow the guidelines and strengthen the identification of potential victims of criminal acts also in the field of irregular migration.
[25] UN Committee against Torture: Concluding observations on the fourt periodic report of Slovenia; 7 December 2023, available here.
[26] COE, Greta carries out its fourt evaluation visit to Slovenia, 16-19 December 2025, available here.
[27] U.S. Embassy in Slovenia, Trafficking in Persons Report 2025, available here.
[28] PATS is short for Identification, Assistance and Protection of victims of trafficking and/or SGBV.
[29] Društvo Ključ, available here.
[30] EUAA, Slovenia operational plan 2022-2024: Ex post evaluation report, October 2024, available here.
[31] Information provided by Društvo Ključ, April 2026.
[32] Observation by the PIC.
[33] Official statistics provided by UOIM, March 2026.
[34] Article 17(2) IPA.
[35] Article 17(3) IPA.
[36] Article 17(4), (5) and (7) IPA.
[37] Article 17(6) IPA.
[38] Observation by the PIC also evident from the official statistics.
[39] Observation by the PIC.
[40] Official statistics provided by the Migration directorate, March 2026.
[41] Article 17(2) IPA.