Foreigners in the Czech Republic

The course of the asylum procedure is regulated by Act No. 325/1999 Coll., on Asylum and on the Amendment to Act No. 283/1991 Coll., on the Police of the Czech Republic (hereinafter referred to as the Asylum Act). On 1 February 2002, Amendment No. 2/2002 Coll., to the Asylum Act entered into force. The commencement of the asylum procedure is conditional on the foreigner’s statement apparently showing the foreigner’s intention to ask for granting asylum. The statement can be made at a border crossing, reception centre, detention centre for foreigners, health establishment during hospitalisation, or prison. The foreigner’s duty is to make appearance in the reception centre within 24 hours since he/she made the statement to submit the application for asylum.

The administrative body ruling in the 1st instance on the matter is the Ministry of the Interior of the Czech Republic (the Asylum and Migration Policies Department). Within ninety days following the commencement of the procedure, the Ministry issues its meritorious decision. Filing remonstrance with the Minister of the Interior had been the form of appeal against the Ministry’s (first instance) decision by 31 January 2002. For the purpose of making decisions on remonstrance, the Minister set up the Remonstrance Commission for the work of which the staff of the Remonstrance Commission Unit under the Asylum and Migration Policies of the Ministry of the Interior prepared necessary documents and data. From 1 February 2002, the applicants could file an application for remedial measure against the Ministry’s decision with the High Court in Prague. This step, also stipulated in the amendment to the Asylum Act, ensures that the asylum seeker can be provided with an independent review by the Court of the administrative decision. The Minister of the Interior could make meritorious decision and thus decide that the asylum would be granted or confirm the first instance decision or abolish the first instance decision and refer the case new asylum procedure. The court reviews the decision for legality - it does not decide on the asylum matter. Hence, it can either confirm the decision of the administrative body or abolish and refer it to new procedure. From 1 January 2003, this legislation was amended again and unsuccessful asylum seekers are free to bring an action against the decision of the Ministry of the Interior with a regional court of justice. Thus, as at the same date, all remedial measures were moved from the High Court to regional courts of justice. Due to that this publication does not include tables describing the course of the procedures at the High Court; they are replaced by tables showing procedures on the level of regional courts.

The Ministry of the Interior establishes asylum facilities (reception centres, residential centres, and integration asylum centres) for asylum seekers and refugees. Such a foreigner has to stay in the reception centre for the time stipulated by the law (for the purpose of identification, writing his/her application for asylum, medical examinations, etc.). The reception centres are established in the municipality of Vyšní Lhoty, District of Frýdek-Místek; the airport Praha-Ruzyně, and in the detention centres for foreigners (Balková, Frýdek-Místek, Velké Přílepy, Poštorná, a Bělá pod Bezdězem). The asylum seeker leaves the reception centre for the residential centre where he/she is accommodated until the decision on the grant of asylum comes into force. The residential centres are located in the municipalities of Zastávka u Brna, District of Brno - venkov; Červený Újezd, District of Teplice; Bělá pod Bezdězem, District of Mladá Boleslav; Havířov, District of Karviná; Seč, District of Chrudim; Bruntál, District of Bruntál; Zbýšov, District of Brno - venkov; Stráž pod Ralskem, District of Česká Lípa; and Kostelec nad Orlicí, District of Rychnov nad Kněžnou. The integration asylum centre is used to temporarily accommodate foreigners who were granted asylum. The integration asylum centres are found in the municipalities of Jaroměř, District of Náchod; Zastávka u Brna, District of Brno - venkov; Krásná Lípa, District of Děčín; Náchod, District of Náchod; and Ústí nad Labem - Předlice, District of Ústí nad Labem.

Methodological notes on the table

Table 2-1 New applications for asylum procedure and decisions by both instances of administrative procedure: 2003

The numbers of decisions entail all decisions, including the ones concerning minors participating in the procedure and for whom their statutory representative lodges the application. The total number of decisions is not a simple sum of the types of decisions presented in the table, but also includes other decisions (e.g. withdrawals of the right to asylum already granted. In total comparison, however, these are minimum in number.

Table 2-3 Decisions of the second administrative distance: 2003

Since 1 February 2002, the asylum seekers have started appealing to the High Court, but the Secretariat of the Remonstrance Commission was still receiving during the entire year 2003 remonstrances against decisions lodged by 31 January 2002. The Commission consists of three representatives of state bodies and four representatives of non-state institutions. In its resolutions, the Commission recommends decisions to be made on a particular case by the Minister of the Interior. It is supposed to work until all remonstrances are decided on (probably until the end of 2004).

Table 2-4 Asylum procedure at regional courts of law: 2003

Since 1 January 2003 unsuccessful asylum seekers can lodge an appeal against the Ministry of Interior’s decision with the relevant regional court (depending on the place of residence of the seeker in the time the appeal is lodged). If a seeker receives a negative decision of the regional court, he ceases to be an asylum seeker (after the decision comes into force). A foreigner can lodge a cassation complaint against the decision of a regional court with the Supreme Administrative Court in the city of Brno. If the legal conditions are met, he or she can be granted a stay sufferance visa. (Note: the data on the number of participants of procedures in the table include persons, appeals of which were not decided about by regional courts, yet, or the decisions have not come into force, yet).

Table 2-5 Course of the cassation complaints proceedings at the Supreme Administrative Court: 2003

The number of participants in the proceedings is a number of citizens about the cassation complaints of whom have not been ordinary decided, yet.

Table 2-7 Asylum seekers: by place of residence; 31 December 2003

The asylum facilities include reception, residential and integration asylum centres, while other places of stay include hospitals, prisons, and detention facilities for foreigners.

Table 2-13 Citizenship of the CR granted to refugees

According to Act No. 325/1999 Coll., on Asylum - asylum is extinguished when the citizenship is granted. Hence, the columns for 2000 to 2003 list the numbers of persons whose asylum extinguished due to the granting of citizenship.

In 2003, the most significant group of asylum seekers included citizens of Russia, among whom the biggest increase was recorded (from 7% in 2002 to 43% in 2003; it was 4 852 persons in total) followed by citizens of the Ukraine (2 044 persons, 18%), Slovakia (1 055 persons, 9%), China (854 persons, 7%) and Viet Nam (566 persons, 5%).

81% of asylum seekers lodged their applications at the reception centres of Vyšní Lhoty and Praha-Ruzyně and 11% at detention centres for foreigners. The number of persons who asked for asylum at the detention centres in 2003 was again lower than in 2002. 1% of the applications come from hospitals and prisons (these applications also included children born to asylum seekers - in such a case the asylum seekers concerned do not have to travel to the reception centre and the application is written in the residential centre).

The asylum was granted to 208 persons in 2003, of which to 187 persons in the first instance. 51 persons (42 in the first and 9 in the second instance) were rendered obstacle to leave along with the decision dismissing their applications for asylum.