Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Asylum seeker

An asylum seeker is an individual who has crossed an international border, fleeing their country of origin, and formally applied for recognition as a refugee in a host country, asserting a well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, as defined under the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, with their claim pending adjudication.^[1]^[2] Unlike a refugee, whose status has been affirmatively determined by authorities, an asylum seeker's eligibility remains unresolved until processed, distinguishing protection claims from broader economic migration.^[1] The framework originates from the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, obligating signatory states—now over 140—to assess claims without immediate refoulement to territories of feared harm, though implementation varies by national procedures and burdens.^[2] Globally, asylum applications surged post-2010 due to conflicts in Syria, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, culminating in 8.4 million pending cases by the end of 2024, the highest recorded, amid 123.2 million total forcibly displaced persons.^[3] In the European Union, which receives a disproportionate share, first-instance recognition rates hovered around 43% in 2023, reflecting rigorous scrutiny where many applicants fail to substantiate persecution claims, often conflating generalized violence or poverty with Convention grounds.^[4] Key challenges include protracted backlogs overwhelming administrative capacities, fiscal strains from reception and integration costs, and incentives for abuse, as low approval thresholds in practice enable economic opportunists to exploit safe third country transit while genuine victims face delays.^[4] Empirical data from EU states show substantial rejection rates for nationalities from relatively stable regions, underscoring causal drivers like wage disparities over targeted threats, prompting reforms such as accelerated border procedures and external processing to restore system integrity without undermining core protections.^[5]^[6]

Definition and Legal Framework

Core Definition and Criteria

An asylum seeker is a person who has crossed an international border away from their country of origin or habitual residence and is seeking international protection on the grounds of a well-founded fear of persecution, but whose claim for refugee status has not yet been definitively evaluated or approved by the authorities of the host country.^[7]^[8] This status applies to individuals who formally apply for asylum, distinguishing them from refugees, whose status has been positively determined under the same criteria.^[9] The term lacks a binding definition in the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees but is operationally used by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and states parties to describe applicants during the pendency of their claims.^[10] The core criteria for recognition as an asylum seeker—and potential refugee—stem from Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Refugee Convention, as amended by the 1967 Protocol, requiring proof of persecution or a well-founded fear thereof linked to one of five protected grounds: race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.^[11] Persecution entails severe violations of human rights, such as threats to life, freedom, or physical integrity, inflicted by the state or entities it is unable or unwilling to control; mere economic hardship, generalized violence, or personal disputes not tied to these grounds do not suffice.^[10] The fear must be both subjectively genuine and objectively supportable through evidence of past harm or current risks in the home country.^[10] Applicants must be outside their country of nationality and either unable (due to lack of effective protection) or unwilling to return because of the feared persecution, emphasizing the external dimension of the claim.^[11] Internal relocation within the home country may negate the claim if viable and safe alternatives exist.^[10] While the Convention sets the international baseline, national implementations vary, with some states imposing additional procedural hurdles like safe third country bars or credibility assessments based on arrival manner or documentation.^[12]^[13]

International Legal Foundations

The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, adopted by the United Nations Conference on 28 July 1951 and entering into force on 22 April 1954, establishes the primary international legal framework for protecting refugees, including those seeking asylum.^[14] It defines a refugee as any person who, "owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country."^[15] A cornerstone provision is Article 33, embodying the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits states parties from expelling or returning ("refouler") a refugee to territories where their life or freedom would be threatened on account of the enumerated grounds.^[16] This principle applies once an individual is within a state's territory or at its border, though it permits exceptions for national security or public order threats posed by the individual, subject to due process.^[17] The Convention initially applied only to events occurring before 1 January 1951 and was geographically limited in scope, reflecting its origins in addressing post-World War II displacement primarily in Europe.^[15] To extend its protections amid decolonization and new refugee crises in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees was adopted on 31 January 1967 and entered into force on 4 October 1967.^[18] The Protocol removes the 1951 Convention's temporal and geographical restrictions, applying its substantive provisions universally without requiring ratification of the original Convention, thereby broadening obligations to an additional 92 states parties as of 2023.^[15] Together, these instruments bind 146 states to refugee status determination processes, including asylum claims, while outlining rights such as non-discrimination, access to courts, and basic welfare.^[16] Asylum seekers—individuals who have fled their country and formally requested international protection—are covered under this framework pending determination of refugee status, with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) mandated since 1950 to supervise implementation and provide guidance.^[2] The regime builds on Article 14 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, affirming the right to "seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution," though it imposes no duty on states to grant asylum proactively.^[14] Non-refoulement has evolved as a norm of customary international law, binding even non-signatories, and is reinforced in treaties like the 1984 Convention Against Torture (Article 3), prohibiting returns to foreseeable torture.^[17] States retain sovereignty over admission but must assess claims substantively, excluding those deemed firmly resettled or guilty of serious crimes under Articles 1F and 33(2).^[15] An asylum seeker is distinguished from a refugee primarily by the status of their protection claim: an asylum seeker has fled their country of origin and applied for international protection due to a well-founded fear of persecution on grounds such as race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, but their claim has not yet been definitively evaluated or granted under international law.^[7] In contrast, a refugee meets the criteria outlined in Article 1 of the 1951 Refugee Convention and has received formal recognition of that status, entailing specific legal protections against refoulement (non-return to danger) and rights to assistance, which asylum seekers lack until approval. This procedural difference underscores that not all asylum seekers qualify as refugees; unsuccessful claims may result in rejection, deportation, or alternative statuses, with global data indicating rejection rates varying by host country, such as approximately 30-40% in the European Union in recent years.^[8] Unlike economic migrants or general migrants, who relocate voluntarily across borders primarily for improved employment, education, family reunification, or living standards without a compulsion arising from persecution or harm, asylum seekers invoke mandatory protection obligations under international law rather than discretionary migration pathways.^[19] Economic migrants, lacking a credible fear of individualized harm, do not qualify for asylum or refugee status and face standard immigration enforcement if entering irregularly; for instance, the International Organization for Migration notes that while migrants may number in the hundreds of millions globally, only a fraction—around 1%—seek asylum, highlighting the distinct causal drivers of fear-based flight versus opportunity-seeking.^[20] This legal boundary prevents conflation, as granting asylum to purely economic cases would undermine the non-refoulement principle reserved for those facing genuine threats, a distinction reinforced in protocols like the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.^[21] Asylum seekers differ from internally displaced persons (IDPs) in that the latter have been compelled to flee their homes due to similar threats—conflict, violence, or disasters—but remain within their national borders, thus falling under domestic rather than international protection frameworks.^[22] IDPs, estimated at over 70 million worldwide as of 2023 by the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, lack access to asylum procedures since they have not crossed an international frontier, relying instead on their government's responsibility for aid and safeguards, which often proves inadequate in protracted crises; UNHCR involvement with IDPs is supplementary and non-binding, unlike the binding duties toward asylum seekers under the Refugee Convention.^[23] This territorial distinction ensures that international law addresses cross-border movements while states retain primary sovereignty over internal displacements.^[24]

Historical Context

Origins in Post-World War II Era

The end of World War II in 1945 left Europe with an unprecedented humanitarian crisis, as approximately 11 million people remained displaced across the continent following the surrender of Nazi Germany, including survivors of concentration camps, forced laborers, and ethnic minorities targeted by Nazi policies.^[25] In total, around 65 million individuals in Europe alone were uprooted by the conflict's destruction, population transfers, and atrocities, many refusing repatriation due to fears of retribution under Soviet control or ongoing instability in Eastern Europe.^[26] This displacement, particularly among 1.2 million Eastern European "displaced persons" who rejected return to communist regimes, underscored the need for a structured international response to protect those fleeing persecution, laying the groundwork for modern asylum mechanisms.^[27] In response, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948, which in Article 14 affirmed "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution," providing an early normative foundation for individual claims to protection. To operationalize this, the UN established the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) on December 14, 1950, initially as a temporary body with a three-year mandate to assist European refugees from events before 1945, focusing on legal protection and voluntary repatriation or resettlement.^[28] UNHCR's creation addressed the limitations of prior ad hoc efforts, such as the International Refugee Organization (1946–1952), by emphasizing durable solutions amid Cold War tensions that complicated mass returns. The cornerstone of post-war asylum origins came with the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, adopted on July 28, 1951, in Geneva by 26 states, which for the first time codified a uniform definition of a "refugee" as a person outside their country of nationality with a well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, unable or unwilling to seek state protection.^[2] Central to the convention was the principle of non-refoulement (Article 33), prohibiting return of refugees to territories where their life or freedom would be threatened, which directly enabled asylum claims by establishing legal obligations for host states to assess and grant protection rather than expel arrivals summarily.^[2] Initially limited to pre-1951 events in Europe, reflecting the immediate post-war focus, the convention's framework shifted asylum from sovereign discretion to international standards, influencing national laws and distinguishing asylum seekers—those applying for such status—as distinct from economic migrants or voluntary travelers.^[29] This treaty, ratified by over 140 states today, emerged from UN deliberations starting in 1949, driven by the moral imperative to prevent repeats of pre-war failures to aid Jewish refugees and other persecuted groups.^[30]

Expansion and Key Milestones Since 1951

The 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees removed the 1951 Convention's temporal limitation to events before January 1, 1951, and its geographical restriction primarily to Europe, thereby extending protections universally to future refugees worldwide.^[2] Adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 16, 1966, and entering into force on October 4, 1968, the Protocol has been ratified by 146 states as of 2024, enabling broader application amid decolonization and conflicts in Africa and Asia.^[18] This expansion addressed the limitations of the original Convention, which had been drafted in response to World War II displacements but proved inadequate for post-colonial refugee flows.^[2] Regional instruments further broadened refugee definitions beyond the 1951 framework. The 1969 OAU Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa, adopted on September 10, 1969, in Addis Ababa, extended coverage to individuals fleeing external aggression, occupation, foreign domination, or events seriously disturbing public order, reflecting Africa's experience with civil strife and border disputes.^[31] Ratified by 46 African Union member states, it entered into force on June 20, 1974, and influenced UNHCR operations on the continent.^[31] Similarly, the 1984 Cartagena Declaration on Refugees, a non-binding agreement from a colloquium in Colombia attended by 10 Latin American states, expanded the refugee concept to include those displaced by generalized violence, foreign aggression, internal conflicts, or massive human rights violations, guiding protections during Central American civil wars.^[32] Though not a treaty, it has been incorporated into national laws across the region, such as in Mexico and Brazil.^[32] In Europe, harmonization efforts accelerated with the 1990 Dublin Convention, signed on June 15, 1990, which established criteria for determining the responsible EU member state for asylum applications, aiming to prevent multiple claims and "asylum shopping."^[33] This evolved into the EU's Common European Asylum System (CEAS), formalized under the 1999 Treaty of Amsterdam (effective May 1, 1999), transferring asylum competence to EU level and leading to directives on qualification (2004), procedures (2005), and reception conditions (2003).^[13] Subsequent reforms, including the 2013 recast Dublin Regulation, addressed imbalances exposed by surges like the 2015-2016 Mediterranean arrivals, where over 1 million claims were filed, predominantly from Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq.^[34] The 2018 Global Compact on Refugees, endorsed by the UN General Assembly on December 17, 2018, marked a non-binding framework to enhance burden-sharing, with 79 states pledging support for host countries facing disproportionate inflows, such as Turkey (3.6 million Syrians) and Uganda (1.4 million).^[35] It complements the 1951 Convention by promoting predictable responsibility-sharing without altering core obligations, amid global forced displacement reaching 117.3 million by mid-2024 per UNHCR data.^[36] These developments reflect adaptations to protracted conflicts and migration pressures, though implementation varies, with some states like the US enacting the 1980 Refugee Act to align domestic law with Convention standards while prioritizing security vetting post-9/11.^[37]

Global Scale and Trends

Current Statistics and Demographics

As of the end of 2024, approximately 8.4 million individuals worldwide were registered as asylum-seekers, with claims pending determination under national or UNHCR procedures, reflecting a 22 percent increase from the end of 2023.^[38] ^[39] This backlog expansion stems from elevated application volumes amid protracted conflicts and deteriorating conditions in origin countries, with over 2.5 million new claims lodged in 2024 alone across major destinations.^[39] Demographic profiles of asylum-seekers reveal a skew toward working-age males, particularly in flows to Europe and North America, where single adult men predominate due to the risks and logistics of irregular overland or maritime journeys. In European asylum applications from 2008 to 2020, women constituted just 31 percent of claimants, lower than the roughly 50 percent female share among total forcibly displaced populations globally.^[40] Age distributions similarly emphasize adults aged 18-59, comprising the majority, as younger children and elderly individuals are less mobile; however, children under 18 account for about 40 percent of broader forcibly displaced groups, including some asylum-seeker families.^[41] These patterns underscore causal factors like targeted persecution of males in conflict zones and selective migration strategies, rather than uniform vulnerability across demographics.^[40] Leading countries of origin for asylum-seekers align closely with refugee-generating hotspots, dominated by Syria (ongoing civil war displacing millions), Afghanistan (post-2021 Taliban resurgence), and Venezuela (political and economic implosion). Other key sources include Eritrea (indefinite military conscription), Sudan (ethnic violence and famine), and Colombia (internal armed conflicts), collectively driving over half of global claims.^[41] ^[42] Principal destination states hosting pending caseloads—Germany, the United States, Turkey, France, and Spain—process the bulk, with Europe alone receiving over 1 million applications in 2024, though approval rates vary widely based on nationality and evidence standards.^[41] ^[43]

Regional and Temporal Patterns

Asylum applications worldwide have exhibited significant temporal fluctuations tied to geopolitical crises, with global totals rising from approximately 1 million in 2010 to a record 2.9 million in 2022 across 162 countries, before stabilizing around 2.7 million in OECD nations in the subsequent year.^[44]^[45] By the end of 2024, 8.4 million individuals remained asylum-seekers pending decisions, reflecting protracted processing amid rising backlogs.^[38] These patterns correlate with conflict escalations, such as the Syrian civil war (peaking applications in 2015–2016), the 2021 Taliban resurgence in Afghanistan, Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine (though many Ukrainians received temporary protection rather than formal asylum), and Sudan's 2023 civil war, which displaced over 14 million by 2024.^[38]^[46] Europe has hosted the majority of asylum applications since the 2010s, accounting for over 40% of global totals in peak years, with the EU+ receiving 1.26 million applications in 2015—primarily from Syrians (378,000), Afghans (183,000), and Iraqis (127,000)—driven by Mediterranean sea crossings and Balkan routes.^[47] Applications fell to 596,000 in 2020 amid COVID-19 border closures, rebounded to over 1 million in 2022 amid Afghan and Ukrainian inflows, and declined to approximately 800,000 in 2024, with a further drop to 64,000 monthly by May 2025, reflecting stricter enforcement and reduced irregular arrivals from Syria and Afghanistan.^[43] Germany, France, Spain, and Italy consistently receive the highest volumes, comprising 50–60% of EU+ totals, though recognition rates vary widely (e.g., 40–50% for Syrians versus under 20% for some economic migrants posing as persecution victims).^[47] In North America, asylum patterns show steady increases linked to Central American migration and border policies, with the United States recording 1.1 million credible fear claims (a proxy for defensive asylum screenings) from 2019–2023, peaking at over 300,000 encounters in FY 2023 amid Venezuelan and Haitian surges, though formal grants remain low at 20–30% due to evidentiary standards.^[48] Canada processed around 90,000 applications in 2023, up from 50,000 pre-2020, with temporal spikes from U.S. safe third country exceptions and Hong Kong protests, but applications stabilized in 2024 as processing expedited.^[41] Overall, the region hosts fewer than 10% of global applications but faces high irregular entries, contrasting Europe's formalized systems. Australia and New Zealand exhibit low-volume, policy-constrained patterns, with Australia receiving 13,000–20,000 applications annually post-2013 offshore processing reforms, down from 15,000+ in 2012, primarily from Iran, Pakistan, and stateless Rohingya; deterrence measures like boat turnbacks reduced sea arrivals by over 90% since 2013.^[38] New Zealand maintains under 2,000 yearly, focused on resettlement over walk-in claims. In Asia, applications remain minimal (under 5% global share), with Japan granting fewer than 1,000 annually despite 10,000+ submissions, and China rejecting most of its 5,000–10,000 claims yearly from North Koreans and Uyghurs, prioritizing sovereignty over UNHCR conventions.^[44] Africa sees intra-regional flows, with South Africa hosting 200,000+ pending claims by 2024 (mostly Zimbabweans), and temporal rises from Horn of Africa conflicts (e.g., Eritrea, Somalia), though data underreporting limits precision.^[46] These regional disparities underscore destination choices influenced by geography, welfare systems, and enforcement rigor rather than uniform persecution distribution.

Recent Developments (2023–2025)

In 2023, the global number of asylum-seekers stood at 6.9 million by year's end, contributing to a total of 117.3 million forcibly displaced people worldwide, including refugees and internally displaced persons.^[38] By the end of 2024, this figure rose to 8.4 million asylum-seekers, a 22% increase from 2023, amid ongoing conflicts such as those in Sudan, Ukraine, and the Middle East driving new applications; at least 4.8 million individuals applied for asylum in 2024 through individual or group recognition processes.^[38] ^[49] The refugee population reached 43.7 million by mid-2024, up 1% from the end of 2023, with Syrians filing 163,000 new applications that year, though numbers declined in key destinations like Germany.^[50] ^[51] In Europe, asylum applications in EU+ countries fell 23% in the first half of 2025, totaling 399,000 by June, reflecting stricter border controls and policy shifts amid declining irregular crossings; approximately 4.4 million people benefited from temporary protection by May 2025, largely due to Ukraine-related displacements.^[52] ^[43] The United Kingdom saw applications rise to 88,700 in the year ending June 2025, relating to 111,100 individuals, prompting debates over system reforms and resettlement scaling.^[53] EU-wide, 2024 policies emphasized deterrence, including new rules that expanded border procedures and accelerated returns, though critics argued these undermined migrant rights; Germany's updates allowed detention of applicants if grounds existed upon entry.^[54] ^[55] In the United States, southwest border encounters plummeted in fiscal year 2025 (ending September 30), with Border Patrol apprehending 238,000 migrants—a sharp drop from over 1.5 million the prior year—following intensified enforcement and Mexico's cooperation, including a 99.98% reduction in Darien Gap crossings during May-June 2025 compared to Biden-era peaks.^[56] ^[57] Daily encounters averaged around 952 nationwide in May 2025, down 2% from April, while the immigration court backlog exceeded 3.7 million cases by January 2025, delaying resolutions for pending asylum claims.^[58] ^[12] From October 1, 2025, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services began issuing notices to pending asylum applicants regarding processing updates.^[59] Australia enacted stricter migration measures in 2025, including legislation passed in early September enabling forced deportations of non-citizens, including recognized refugees, to third countries without warning, drawing human rights concerns over due process; the permanent migration program remained at 185,000 visas for 2025-26, steady despite public protests.^[60] ^[61] ^[62] Globally, the Sudan crisis escalated, with over 2.09 million Sudanese refugees by 2025, exacerbating displacement trends amid state fragility and conflict as primary drivers.^[63]

Determination Processes

Initial Application and Screening

Upon arrival at a border or shortly after entering a host country, asylum seekers must register their claim with national authorities or, in some contexts, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) where the latter conducts Refugee Status Determination (RSD) on behalf of states.^[7] This registration process collects biographic data, biometrics such as fingerprints, and initial details of the claim to establish identity and prevent multiple applications or fraud.^[64] In practice, registration should occur within three months of arrival to ensure access, though delays are common in high-volume scenarios.^[64] Screening entails health and vulnerability assessments, including checks for infectious diseases like tuberculosis and evaluations for unaccompanied minors or trafficking victims, alongside security database queries against international watchlists.^[65] A preliminary interview follows, often non-adversarial, to gauge if the claim raises a credible fear of persecution or meets basic non-refoulement thresholds under the 1951 Refugee Convention, filtering out manifestly unfounded cases for expedited rejection or return.^[66] Outcomes determine progression to full merits assessment, accelerated procedures, or denial; for instance, in the European Union under the 2024 Screening Regulation, this phase lasts up to seven days and includes identity verification to route individuals to asylum, border, or removal tracks.^[67] In the United States, irregular entrants undergo a credible fear screening by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) asylum officers, assessing a "significant possibility" of eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture; passage advances claims to immigration court, while failure leads to expedited removal unless appealed.^[68] Australia's process for unauthorized boat arrivals features "enhanced screening" with dual-officer interviews to identify non-refoulement risks, potentially resulting in immediate returns if no viable claim emerges, though onshore visa holders face departmental primary assessments without such rapid exclusion.^[69] These mechanisms prioritize rapid triage amid resource constraints, with empirical data indicating high pass rates in credible fear screenings—over 80% in fiscal years 2010–2023—but criticisms from oversight reports highlight inconsistencies due to officer discretion and linguistic barriers.^[70]

Assessment Methods

Assessment of asylum claims occurs through refugee status determination (RSD) procedures, which evaluate whether applicants meet the criteria established in the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees: a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.^[10] These procedures, conducted by national authorities or UNHCR in mandate situations, emphasize individualized examination to distinguish genuine refugees from economic migrants or others ineligible for protection.^[71] UNHCR procedural standards require decisions based on a comprehensive assessment of the applicant's statements, supporting evidence, and objective country conditions, with interviews serving as the primary tool for eliciting facts.^[72] Credibility evaluation forms the core of assessment methods, focusing on the consistency, coherence, and plausibility of the applicant's account.^[73] Decision-makers scrutinize internal consistency across interviews and documents, external plausibility against known facts, and behavioral indicators such as demeanor during questioning, while accounting for potential trauma-induced inconsistencies like omissions due to fear or memory gaps.^[74] In practice, adverse credibility findings often arise from contradictions in dates, events, or details, or implausible narratives unsupported by evidence; for instance, Canadian guidelines highlight that specialized knowledge of cultural norms or psychological effects of persecution must inform assessments to avoid erroneous rejections.^[74] Multiple interviews may be conducted if initial statements raise doubts, with recording or transcription recommended for transparency.^[75] Country of origin information (COI) underpins risk evaluation by providing objective data on human rights conditions, conflict levels, and persecution patterns in the applicant's home country.^[71] UNHCR and agencies like the European Union Agency for Asylum compile COI reports from diplomatic sources, NGOs, and media, updated regularly to reflect changes; for example, these reports assess whether claimed fears align with documented threats to specific groups, such as ethnic minorities in conflict zones.^[76] Decision-makers cross-reference applicant narratives against COI to determine if persecution is foreseeable, though critiques note that selective or outdated COI can skew outcomes, as seen in studies of German administrative courts where inconsistent application led to variable protection grants.^[77] Specialized forensic methods supplement standard interviews for vulnerable cases. Medical evaluations document physical evidence of torture, such as scars or injuries, using the Istanbul Protocol to correlate findings with the applicant's history, thereby bolstering credibility where direct proof is scarce.^[78] Psychological assessments identify trauma sequelae like post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), evaluating consistency between symptoms and reported events; a 2021 study found these evaluations enhance validity in remote or telephonic formats but require trained clinicians to distinguish genuine distress from malingering.^[79] Language analysis for determination of origin (LADO) employs forensic linguists to analyze speech patterns, dialects, and accents, aiding verification of nationality claims; EU studies from 2022 indicate LADO's utility in disputed cases but caution against over-reliance due to accent acquisition or regional variations.^[80] These methods, while evidentiary, must align with the non-adversarial nature of RSD to uphold due process.^[81]

Decision Outcomes and Appeals

Asylum decisions typically result in one of several outcomes: full refugee status, subsidiary or complementary protection, temporary or humanitarian leave to remain, or outright rejection. Refugee status, as defined under the 1951 Refugee Convention, is granted to individuals demonstrating a well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, entitling recipients to rights including non-refoulement and access to social services. Subsidiary protection applies where return would risk serious harm such as death penalty, torture, or indiscriminate violence in armed conflict, but lacks the full durable rights of refugee status and is more common in regions like the European Union. Rejection occurs when claims fail to meet evidentiary thresholds, often due to safe third-country agreements, manifestly unfounded applications, or credibility issues, leading to removal proceedings.^[39] In 2024, EU+ countries issued 1.1 million first-instance decisions, with overall recognition rates (refugee status or subsidiary protection) at 38%, varying sharply by nationality—e.g., 95% for Syrians versus 4% for Georgians.^[43] Decision timelines and positivity rates differ by jurisdiction, influenced by caseloads, policy changes, and origin-country conditions. In the United States, fiscal year 2023 asylum grant rates averaged 36% across nationalities, with higher approvals for Sudanese (53%) and lower for others like those from India.^[82] The United Kingdom saw initial grant rates drop to below 50% in 2024 amid increased refusals, though Sudanese applicants achieved 99% success due to ongoing conflict.^[83] UNHCR-monitored systems emphasize individualized assessments, but backlogs—e.g., over 400,000 pending cases in the EU+ by mid-2025—delay outcomes, with some applicants waiting years.^[52] Accelerated procedures for safe-origin applicants often yield higher rejection rates, as seen in Denmark's near-90% refusals for certain groups.^[84] Applicants denied at first instance generally have a right to appeal to an independent body, ensuring procedural fairness under international standards like the UNHCR Handbook, though appeal rights may be limited in expedited or border cases. Appeals involve reviewing evidence de novo or on error of law, with legal aid often available but unevenly resourced. In the UK, 48% of asylum appeals were allowed in 2024, overturning initial refusals based on new evidence or Home Office errors, though a 264% surge in appeals to 29,172 cases strained tribunals.^[85] EU-wide, 50,265 positive final-instance outcomes followed appeals in 2024, representing about 20% of total decisions as refugee status.^[86] US appeals to the Board of Immigration Appeals succeed in roughly 10-15% of cases, per historical data, with further federal court review possible but rare.^[82] Success hinges on demonstrating legal errors or overlooked persecution risks, but low rates reflect stringent standards and resource constraints, with UNHCR noting systemic delays exacerbate vulnerability.^[39] Exhaustion of appeals typically triggers deportation, barring suspensive effects or humanitarian stays.

Rights, Obligations, and Daily Realities

Protections Under International Law

The principal framework for protections of asylum seekers under international law is the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, adopted on July 28, 1951, and its 1967 Protocol, which expanded its scope by removing temporal and geographical limitations.^[11] These instruments define a refugee as a person outside their country of nationality or habitual residence who has a well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, and is unable or unwilling to seek protection from that country.^[2] Asylum seekers, as individuals applying for recognition of this status, benefit from key safeguards during the determination process, primarily because refugee status is declaratory in nature—meaning protections attach upon meeting the criteria, irrespective of formal recognition.^[87] Central to these protections is the principle of non-refoulement, enshrined in Article 33(1) of the 1951 Convention, which mandates that no contracting state shall "expel or return ('refouler') a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion."^[11] This prohibition extends to asylum seekers pending a final status decision, prohibiting expulsion or return before claims are assessed, and applies at borders, during transit, or within territory.^[1] Non-refoulement has attained customary international law status, binding even on non-signatory states, and is reinforced by human rights treaties such as Article 3 of the 1984 Convention Against Torture, which bars return where substantial grounds exist for believing the individual would face torture.^[1] Exceptions under Article 33(2) are narrowly permitted for refugees deemed a danger to national security or, having been convicted of a particularly serious crime, a danger to the community, but require formal processes and assurances against persecution.^[11] Article 31(1) further protects asylum seekers by prohibiting penalties for illegal entry or presence on territory if they arrived directly from a place of persecution, presented themselves without delay to authorities, and provided good cause for their irregular entry.^[11] States may temporarily regulate movements but must allow identity and status examinations.^[11] Additional provisions include non-discrimination in application of Convention rights (Article 3) and, upon recognition, access to courts (Article 16), wage-earning employment (Article 17), and public relief (Article 23), though these accrue post-determination.^[11] The Convention builds on Article 14 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, affirming the right to seek asylum from persecution, though it does not confer an absolute right to enter or reside.^[2] Regional instruments, such as the 1969 OAU Convention and 1984 Cartagena Declaration, extend similar protections in Africa and Latin America, broadening persecution grounds to include generalized violence.^[14]

Access to Services and Employment

Asylum seekers, pending determination of their claims, generally receive limited access to services and employment compared to recognized refugees or nationals, with policies designed to balance humanitarian obligations against incentives for unsubstantiated claims. Under international human rights law, including the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol—ratified by 146 countries—asylum seekers are entitled to non-refoulement and basic reception conditions such as emergency healthcare and housing, but the Convention's explicit right to wage-earning employment applies primarily to status-granted refugees rather than pending applicants.^[88]^[89] In practice, access to welfare benefits like cash assistance or non-emergency services is often restricted to minimal material reception standards to avoid creating pull factors for economic migration, as evidenced by UNHCR data showing that over 70% of the global refugee population in 2023 resided in countries with formal employment barriers for those without status.^[90]^[91] In the European Union, the recast Reception Conditions Directive (2013/33/EU, amended in the 2024 Pact on Migration and Asylum) mandates member states to grant labor market access to asylum seekers no later than nine months after lodging an application, though many states impose sector-specific or quota-based restrictions, such as permitting only low-skilled work in agriculture or hospitality.^[92] For services, asylum seekers receive standardized material support including housing, food allowances averaging €200-400 monthly per person in countries like Germany and France as of 2023, and access to primary healthcare, but full social welfare integration is deferred until status determination to mitigate fiscal burdens, with empirical studies indicating that early work access correlates with higher claim volumes without proportional recognition rates.^[93] Non-governmental reports note variations, such as Sweden allowing access after six months but with language and qualification barriers reducing effective employment to under 20% within the first year.^[89] In the United States, asylum seekers may apply for employment authorization via Form I-765 after 150 days of pendency following filing, but eligibility requires at least 180 total days without USCIS delays, resulting in average waits of 6-12 months amid a backlog exceeding 1 million cases as of October 2025; a new $550 fee for initial applications took effect July 2025.^[59]^[94] Services include limited access to emergency Medicaid and public education for minors, but no federal cash assistance or food stamps until work authorization or status grant, with states like California providing supplemental aid that critics argue incentivizes frivolous claims given asylum grant rates below 30% for affirmative applications in fiscal year 2024.^[12] In Canada, eligible refugee claimants receive an open work permit shortly after claim referral to the Immigration and Refugee Board, enabling immediate employment, alongside Interim Federal Health Program coverage for essential medical services and potential provincial social assistance if income falls below thresholds, though no dedicated federal welfare stream exists beyond startup payments for government-assisted arrivals.^[95]^[96] Australia maintains stringent restrictions, denying work rights to asylum seekers arriving by unauthorized boat under offshore processing policies, with onshore applicants on bridging visas often ineligible for employment or mainstream services like income support and Medicare until claim resolution, which averaged over 1,000 days in 2023; limited case-by-case access to community assistance exists, but empirical data from refugee advocacy groups highlight employment rates below 10% for this cohort due to policy-induced destitution.^[97]^[98] Across jurisdictions, delays in employment access stem from causal incentives to filter genuine persecution cases from labor migration, supported by World Bank analyses showing that unrestricted early work rights in host countries increase asylum inflows by up to 20% without elevating approval rates.^[90]^[99]

Restrictions and Detention Practices

Asylum seekers frequently face restrictions on movement, such as mandatory regular reporting to authorities, residence in designated areas or facilities, and prohibitions on international travel until their claims are resolved. These measures aim to ensure compliance with application processes and mitigate flight risks, though they vary by jurisdiction; for instance, in the European Union, the Dublin Regulation often requires asylum seekers to remain in the first country of entry, with penalties for absconding including fines or re-detention. In the United States, affirmative asylum applicants may be subject to parole conditions or orders of supervision, including electronic monitoring or curfews, particularly if released from initial custody.^[59] Employment restrictions are also common, with many countries delaying work authorization; in the US, asylum seekers must wait at least 150 days after filing to apply for a permit, and approval can take longer due to backlogs exceeding 1 million cases as of 2024.^[59] Detention practices for asylum seekers are governed by international standards emphasizing detention as a measure of last resort, permissible only when necessary for purposes like verifying identity, assessing flight risk, or protecting national security, and must be proportionate with individualized assessments.^[100] The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) guidelines stipulate that alternatives to detention—such as bail, reporting requirements, or community supervision—should be prioritized, especially for vulnerable groups including children, pregnant women, and torture survivors, whose detention is deemed inherently undesirable.^[100] Conditions in detention facilities must be non-punitive, humane, and separate from criminal prisoners, with access to legal aid, medical care, and independent oversight; violations, such as prolonged isolation or inadequate healthcare, have been documented in multiple reports.^[100]^[101] In practice, detention durations and scales differ significantly. In the US, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detained over 260,000 individuals in fiscal year 2024, with an average stay of about 52 days as of late 2023, though some facilities report averages exceeding 200 days, often linked to backlog delays and limited release options.^[102]^[103] Australia's policies historically involved indefinite offshore detention on Nauru and Manus Island for boat arrivals, but a 2023 High Court ruling declared such detention unlawful absent a reasonable prospect of removal, leading to releases or transfers by 2024 while maintaining strict onshore restrictions.^[104] In the EU, the 2024 Pact on Migration and Asylum facilitates border detention during accelerated screening procedures, potentially lasting up to 12 weeks, with member states like Greece and Italy operating hotspot centers where capacities reached 20,000 detainees in 2023 amid influxes.^[105]^[106] These practices, while justified by governments for deterrence and verification, often exceed UNHCR-recommended limits, prompting criticisms from human rights monitors over health impacts and proportionality.^[100]^[54]

Effects on Host Societies

Economic Consequences

Asylum seekers generate substantial initial fiscal costs for host countries, including expenditures on reception centers, legal processing, healthcare, and basic welfare provisions during the application phase, often before employment is permitted. In the European Union, these upfront costs for the 2015-2016 influx alone exceeded €20 billion annually in countries like Germany, encompassing housing, language training, and social assistance, with processing delays exacerbating dependency periods of up to 18-24 months in nations such as Germany.^[107] ^[108] Over longer horizons, net fiscal impacts vary by region and migrant characteristics; a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services analysis of refugees and asylees from 2005-2019 found a positive net contribution of $123.8 billion, driven by eventual tax payments surpassing benefits received after about eight years.^[109] In contrast, European studies reveal predominantly negative lifetime fiscal effects for non-EU migrants, including asylum seekers, with annual net costs ranging from 12-22% of GDP per capita in origin-country adjusted models, attributed to lower education levels, higher family sizes, and persistent welfare reliance.^[110] ^[111] Labor market integration of asylum seekers remains challenging, with employment rates lagging natives due to skill mismatches, language barriers, and initial work restrictions, leading to elevated welfare dependency. In the EU, non-EU born individuals aged 20-64 had an employment rate of approximately 65% in 2018, compared to 74% for natives, with asylum seekers from regions like sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East showing even lower rates owing to limited transferable skills.^[112] These dynamics contribute to fiscal strain, as social security contributions from asylum seekers often fail to offset expenditures on education and health, representing up to 0.9% of GDP in revenue but higher outflows in several member states.^[113] Delays in granting work rights amplify this; for instance, extending bans by seven months correlates with 20% lower employment probability five years later, perpetuating cycles of benefit receipt.^[114] On balance, while some macroeconomic analyses detect neutral or modestly positive aggregate effects through consumer spending and induced demand—such as one additional asylum seeker boosting short-run local employment by 0.42 jobs in targeted studies—these gains are offset by wage pressures on low-skilled native workers and elevated public spending in high-inflow scenarios.^[115] ^[116] In Germany, post-2015 refugee arrivals contributed to a net fiscal drain of about 1.13% of GDP in certain projections, with non-Western immigrants exhibiting negative average net fiscal impacts over lifetimes due to below-average contributions relative to benefits.^[117] Empirical evidence underscores that outcomes hinge on host policies favoring rapid integration and skill-selective admissions, yet widespread asylum fraud—where economic migrants pose as persecuted—dilutes benefits and amplifies costs across jurisdictions.^[118] Asylum seekers frequently encounter profound barriers to social integration, stemming from linguistic deficiencies, cultural disparities, and limited social networks in host societies. Language barriers, in particular, restrict access to employment, education, and essential services, with empirical studies demonstrating that refugees with low host-country proficiency experience significantly reduced labor market participation and socio-economic mobility.^[119] ^[120] Targeted language training has been shown to mitigate these effects by enhancing communication skills and fostering interactions with natives, yet many programs fall short due to insufficient duration or quality.^[121] Prolonged asylum waiting periods compound these challenges, correlating with deteriorated physical and emotional health among applicants, which in turn impedes community engagement and long-term settlement.^[122] Ethnic enclaves and residential segregation often emerge as unintended outcomes of asylum dispersal policies, fostering parallel societies where migrants maintain origin-country norms and minimize contact with host populations. High levels of ethnic clustering preserve cultural ties to home countries but hinder broader assimilation, leading to weakened social cohesion and mutual trust in diverse neighborhoods.^[123] ^[124] Reception systems in countries like those in the European Union can exacerbate this by channeling asylum seekers into economically disadvantaged areas post-processing, perpetuating cycles of isolation and dependency.^[125] Such patterns contribute to perceptions of cultural fragmentation, with surveys and analyses indicating reduced neighborhood solidarity in high-migrant locales.^[126] Integration challenges also manifest in elevated welfare reliance, as asylum seekers and recognized refugees exhibit higher rates of benefit receipt than natives, driven by credential non-recognition, skill mismatches, and restricted work rights during processing. In the United States, administrative data reveal substantial welfare utilization among refugee households, challenging assumptions of rapid self-sufficiency.^[127] ^[128] European analyses similarly document disparities in extra-EU migrant benefit claims, attributing this to integration delays that strain public resources and fuel native resentment.^[129] Public safety concerns arise from heterogeneous crime impacts, with causal studies finding no immediate rise in offenses upon arrival but elevated rates in property and violent crimes one to two years later in contexts like Turkey's Syrian influx.^[130] ^[131] These patterns, linked to unemployment and enclave dynamics, erode social trust and amplify integration hurdles, though aggregate effects vary by host-country enforcement and migrant demographics.^[132] Overall, unresolved integration deficits risk entrenching divisions, underscoring the need for policies prioritizing verifiable assimilation metrics over indefinite accommodation.

Security and Public Order Implications

In several European host countries, asylum seekers have been linked to heightened security risks, including disproportionate involvement in violent and sexual crimes, which strain law enforcement resources and erode public trust. Official analyses indicate that inadequate pre-arrival vetting and cultural differences contribute to these patterns, as individuals from regions with prevalent clan-based violence or lax norms on interpersonal conduct enter without sufficient integration safeguards. For instance, in Sweden, foreign-born persons—including a significant portion of recent asylum recipients—comprised 58% of total crime suspects in 2017, escalating to 73% for murder, manslaughter, and attempted murder cases.^[133] ^[134] Non-registered migrants, often overlapping with asylum flows, were associated with 13% of total crimes despite representing a small demographic share.^[133] Public order disruptions have manifested in mass incidents tied to asylum seeker concentrations, exemplified by the 2015-2016 New Year's Eve assaults in Cologne, Germany, where organized groups of men—predominantly North African migrants, including asylum applicants—targeted over 1,200 women with groping, robberies, and rapes amid inadequate police response.^[135] ^[136] This event, involving at least 1,000 suspects, catalyzed policy reforms, including stricter asylum criteria and enhanced sexual offense prosecutions, as it highlighted failures in managing unvetted inflows exceeding 1 million arrivals in 2015 alone.^[136] ^[137] Similar patterns in the UK reveal asylum accommodations as hotspots for offenses, with reports documenting 708 criminal charges—including multiple rapes and assaults—from partial hotel data in 2025, underscoring risks from housing large numbers of single adult males without robust screening.^[138] Terrorism threats amplify these implications, as asylum seekers from conflict zones serve as vectors for imported extremism; empirical studies confirm that inflows from terrorist-prone states correlate with elevated attack risks in destinations, independent of economic factors.^[139] In Europe, perpetrators of jihadist incidents—such as the 2016 Berlin Christmas market attack by a rejected Tunisian asylum seeker—have included recent arrivals exploiting porous borders, contributing to a documented rise in Islamist plots post-2015 migration surge.^[140] Policy analyses in the UK further link high asylum volumes to increased communal violence and terror probabilities, with irregular entries facilitating organized crime networks that exploit migrant routes for smuggling and radicalization.^[141] ^[142] These dynamics foster parallel societies, including gang-influenced enclaves in Sweden and Germany, where asylum seeker subgroups engage in or fall victim to escalating feuds, as evidenced by 391 shootings in Sweden in 2022, many tied to unintegrated migrant networks.^[143] Overall, such outcomes reflect causal pressures from rapid demographic shifts outpacing assimilation capacities, prompting fortified border measures across affected jurisdictions.^[141]

Criticisms and Debates

Evidence of System Abuse and Fraud

In the United States, federal authorities have prosecuted multiple organized schemes exploiting the asylum process through fabricated claims, forged documents, and coordinated smuggling. In September 2025, the Department of Justice charged 12 individuals in a Tampa-based conspiracy that smuggled migrants and submitted fraudulent asylum applications, laundering over $18 million in proceeds from fees charged to participants.^[144] Similar operations involve corrupt attorneys and notaries; for instance, in November 2024, five defendants, including an immigration lawyer, were indicted for a large-scale fraud ring that bribed officials and secured improper benefits for dozens of aliens via false filings.^[145] In March 2025, a Florida woman faced charges for orchestrating the submission of fraudulent asylum applications on behalf of others, demonstrating how individuals exploit lax initial screenings to enter and remain pending adjudication.^[146] Historical patterns reveal persistent abuse via professional enablers. A 2021 case sentenced a fake immigration attorney to over 20 years for filing hundreds of baseless asylum petitions with invented persecution narratives and counterfeit supporting evidence.^[147] Earlier, in 2014, a Manhattan lawyer received five years for leading a ring that coached applicants on false stories of gang violence or political oppression to mimic credible fear.^[148] These schemes thrive on the volume of applications overwhelming verification; U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and Immigration and Customs Enforcement data indicate that fraud detection often occurs post-entry, after migrants have accessed benefits or absconded hearings. Asylum denial rates further underscore systemic strain from unsubstantiated claims, where applicants fail to provide corroborating evidence of persecution despite the burden of proof. In U.S. immigration courts, grant rates for decided asylum cases fell to 35.8% in October 2024, meaning over 64% were denied after merits review, reflecting claims that do not meet legal thresholds for genuine fear.^[149] Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse analysis of Executive Office for Immigration Review data shows denial rates exceeding 50% consistently since 2020, with spikes to 80% in high-volume months like April 2025, attributable to patterns of inconsistent testimonies and unverifiable origins.^[150]^[151] High abscondia rates—where applicants skip hearings after release—corroborate evasion tactics; government tracking estimates 15-20% non-appearance in asylum dockets, enabling fraudulent entrants to embed in communities without resolution.^[152] Internationally, analogous abuses manifest in coordinated false claims tied to economic migration. While European Union data emphasize rising grants (437,900 protections in 2024, up 6.9% from 2023), rejection volumes imply meritless filings, as first-instance decisions deny over half of applications in key states like Germany and France per Eurostat.^[86] Europol reports highlight organized crime networks forging identities for asylum bids, though prosecutions lag due to evidentiary hurdles in cross-border cases. In the UK, 2023 data showed 30% of claims from small boat arrivals—often from safe countries like Albania—yielding high refusal rates upon scrutiny for lacking individualized persecution risks, pointing to incentive-driven abuse.^[153] These patterns, driven by lucrative smuggling fees and welfare access, erode credibility assessments, as initial presumptions of validity enable entry before fraud detection.

Policy Shortcomings and Incentive Structures

Current asylum policies in many Western nations feature extensive processing backlogs that incentivize non-meritorious claims, as applicants can often secure temporary legal status, work authorization, and benefits while awaiting resolution. In the United States, the affirmative asylum backlog surpassed one million cases for the first time in fiscal year 2024, with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) adjudicating only 3% of claims received in fiscal years 2022 and 2023 within the statutory 180-day timeframe.^[154] ^[155] This delay structure allows claimants to apply for employment authorization after 150 days, effectively providing an entry point for labor market access regardless of claim validity, which critics argue encourages economic migrants to exploit the system rather than pursue legal work visas.^[155] Similarly, in Europe, prolonged appeals processes—often extending over years—result in de facto residence permits, reducing the deterrent effect of potential rejection and contributing to secondary migration within the continent.^[156] Enforcement gaps in safe third country agreements further distort incentives by permitting "asylum shopping," where migrants bypass protection in proximate safe nations to reach preferred destinations with superior economic opportunities. The U.S. third-country asylum rule, implemented in 2019, aimed to bar eligibility for those failing to seek refuge in the first safe country encountered, yet irregular enforcement and legal challenges have limited its impact, allowing continued transit through multiple nations en route to the U.S. or Europe.^[157] In the European Union, the Dublin Regulation's criteria for assigning responsibility have proven ineffective against secondary movements, with data showing widespread non-compliance as asylum seekers relocate to countries offering better welfare or family ties, exacerbating uneven burden-sharing among member states.^[158] ^[159] Low deportation rates compound this, as rejected claimants frequently abscond or benefit from humanitarian stays, with U.S. in absentia removal orders issued for non-appearance but actual repatriations remaining under 20% of final orders in recent years due to resource constraints and diplomatic hurdles. Welfare provisions and family reunification pathways create additional pull factors, drawing migrants beyond those fleeing genuine persecution. Studies indicate that while social networks exert the strongest influence on destination choice, generous asylum support—such as housing, cash assistance, and healthcare—serves as a secondary attractor, particularly in Nordic countries where benefits approximate 50-70% of native unemployment aid, prompting debates over whether these systems subsidize irregular migration under the guise of protection.^[160] ^[161] Family reunification for granted asylees enables chain effects, permitting sponsorship of extended relatives and amplifying initial migration flows; in the U.S., this has led to over 75% of family-based immigration visas facilitating such links, including from asylee households, which incentivizes borderline claims to establish a foothold for broader family entry.^[162] These structures, while intended for humanitarian ends, often fail to incorporate stringent credibility screening or time-bound processing, resulting in approval rates below 30% for many nationalities—signaling high volumes of ineligible economic or opportunistic applications—yet persistent system overload from unaddressed fraud risks.^[163] ^[156]

Competing Perspectives on Reform

Proponents of stricter asylum reforms argue that current systems incentivize fraudulent claims and economic migration, necessitating measures to restore integrity and deter abuse. For instance, policies requiring asylum applications only at ports of entry or in the first safe country of transit have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing irregular crossings; during a 2019 U.S. implementation, application volumes dropped significantly while approval rates for legitimate claims rose, indicating a filtering of weaker cases.^[164] Advocates, including conservative think tanks, propose redesigning post-World War II frameworks to prioritize national security and sovereignty, such as expedited removals for ineligible claimants and higher evidentiary burdens, citing data showing asylum as a de facto channel for unauthorized labor migration rather than genuine persecution.^[165] These views gained bipartisan traction in a 2024 U.S. Senate proposal that tied aid to border controls, imposing tougher asylum standards during high-traffic periods, which aimed to cut encounters by empowering rapid denials and expanding detention.^[166] Empirical evidence from such reforms underscores causal links between lax access and surges, with restrictionists emphasizing that unchecked inflows strain resources without proportional humanitarian benefits.^[167] In contrast, advocates for more permissive or capacity-focused reforms prioritize humanitarian obligations and systemic efficiency, proposing expansions in legal pathways and processing to handle backlogs without curtailing protections. Organizations aligned with liberal policy circles recommend increasing immigration judges—supported by 60% of Americans in surveys—and creating additional visa categories for refugees to reduce irregular arrivals, arguing that underfunding perpetuates delays averaging years per case.^[168] These perspectives, often from groups like the Center for American Progress, advocate barring irregular entrants from asylum while bolstering orderly applications abroad, though critics note such proposals may overlook fraud data, as evidenced by low approval rates (under 20% in some U.S. cohorts) suggesting many claims fail credibility tests.^[169] Proponents contend that data-driven innovations, like algorithmic matching for resettlement, could optimize integration without strict barriers, drawing on studies showing policy bundles combining economic aid and social services improve immigrant outcomes.^[170] However, these views frequently emanate from advocacy-oriented sources with incentives to emphasize inflows' benefits, potentially downplaying security risks documented in government reports on vetting gaps.^[171] Emerging consensus across ideological lines highlights hybrid approaches, such as modernizing adjudication with technology and safe-third-country pacts, as seen in recent U.S. executive actions and international panels critiquing the global system's overload from non-persecution motives.^[167]^[172] Public opinion data reveals broad support for balancing security with legality, with majorities favoring more judges and enforcement but opposing blanket expansions that ignore abuse evidence.^[168] Debates persist on incentive structures, where restrictionists cite causal evidence of pull factors like work access driving claims, while opponents risk underestimating fraud's scale, as peer-reviewed analyses affirm policy reforms' role in curbing ineligible migration without eroding core protections.^[173]^[174]

Jurisdictional Variations

United States Policies and Practices

Asylum in the United States is governed by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended by the Refugee Act of 1980, which incorporates the definition of a refugee from the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol.^[175] To qualify, an applicant must demonstrate past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution in their home country on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.^[9] Applications must be filed using Form I-589 within one year of arrival in the United States or at a port of entry, unless exceptions apply for changed circumstances or extraordinary reasons.^[59] Affirmative asylum claims are adjudicated by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), while defensive claims arise in immigration court during removal proceedings overseen by the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR).^[59] At the U.S.-Mexico border, many asylum seekers encounter expedited removal procedures under section 235(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, triggering a credible fear screening by USCIS asylum officers to determine initial eligibility for a full merits hearing.^[59] Successful credible fear determinations lead to release into the interior pending adjudication, often with notices to appear in immigration court, though detention may continue based on flight risk or danger assessments.^[59] In fiscal year 2023, USCIS granted 22,300 affirmative asylum applications, while EOIR granted an additional 32,050 defensive asylums, for a total of 54,350 asylees admitted.^[176] However, backlogs remain substantial, with 1,446,908 affirmative applications pending as of December 31, 2024, and over 2.2 million defensive asylum cases in immigration court as of August 2025.^[12]^[177] Asylum grant rates in immigration courts declined to 35.8% by October 2024, reflecting heightened scrutiny and evidentiary requirements.^[149] Policy implementations have varied by administration. The first Trump administration (2017–2021) introduced the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), requiring certain asylum seekers to await U.S. hearings in Mexico, and a transit rule barring asylum for those who did not apply for protection in a third country en route.^[178] The Biden administration (2021–2025) terminated MPP and the transit rule but, facing record border encounters, enacted a June 2024 regulation presumptively ineligible for asylum those crossing irregularly between ports of entry when daily encounters exceeded 2,500, with limited exceptions for acute medical emergencies or unaccompanied minors; this was expanded in September 2024 to include harsher screening barriers.^[179] Following the 2024 election, the second Trump administration issued executive orders on January 20, 2025, suspending the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program until realigned with national interests and directing strict enforcement of immigration laws against inadmissible aliens, including expedited removals.^[180]^[181] Evidence of asylum system abuse includes documented cases of fraudulent applications, such as a 2025 conviction of a Tibetan individual for submitting profit-driven false claims and a 2020 ICE prosecution of an attorney filing over 215 bogus applications.^[182]^[183] Federal agencies have not systematically quantified fraud prevalence, per a 2015 Government Accountability Office assessment, though low grant rates—averaging around 14% of decisions in fiscal year 2023—and high volumes from countries without widespread persecution indicate many claims serve as vehicles for economic migration rather than genuine refugee protection.^[163] High no-show rates in court, often exceeding 80% in some jurisdictions historically, further suggest incentives for insincere filings enabled by prolonged processing delays.^[152]

European Union Framework

The Common European Asylum System (CEAS) establishes a framework for harmonized standards in asylum processing across EU member states, originating from the 1999 Tampere Programme and comprising key legislative instruments such as the Dublin Regulation, Qualification Directive, Asylum Procedures Directive, and Reception Conditions Directive.^[13]^[184] The system aims to ensure uniform refugee status determination, prevention of multiple applications, and efficient responsibility allocation, though implementation varies, leading to disparities in application numbers and recognition rates among states.^[185] The Dublin Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 604/2013) determines the member state responsible for examining an asylum application, prioritizing criteria like family ties, prior visa issuance, or first entry point to avoid forum shopping and ensure swift processing by a single state.^[186] In practice, reliance on first-entry rules has concentrated burdens on frontline states such as Greece, Italy, and Spain, with low transfer rates—only about 20-30% of outgoing requests fulfilled annually—exacerbating secondary movements and straining border capacities.^[187] The Qualification Directive (Directive 2011/95/EU), recast as Regulation (EU) 2024/1347 effective from 2026, sets minimum standards for granting refugee status under the 1951 Geneva Convention or subsidiary protection for those facing serious harm, including definitions of persecution, internal flight alternatives, and exclusion grounds for serious non-political crimes or security threats.^[188]^[189] It mandates evidence-based assessments but permits national variations in subsidiary protection, contributing to divergent recognition rates—EU-wide first-instance rates hovered around 40-50% in recent years, with higher approvals for Syrians (over 90%) and lower for others like Georgians (under 5%).^[185] The 2024 New Pact on Migration and Asylum reforms CEAS by introducing mandatory solidarity mechanisms, such as relocation quotas or financial/logistical contributions from member states, accelerated border screening within seven days, and crisis-response rules for mass influxes, aiming to balance responsibilities while enhancing external border management and returns.^[105]^[190] Applicable from mid-2026 after a two-year preparation period, the Pact addresses prior shortcomings like insufficient burden-sharing but faces implementation hurdles, including opt-out provisions for non-participants and reliance on national compliance, amid ongoing high application volumes—over 900,000 first-time claims in 2024, declining 13% from 2023.^[191]^[192] Despite these advances, systemic challenges persist, including inconsistent procedures, backlogs exceeding 1 million cases EU-wide, and limited returns (under 20% of negative decisions enforced), underscoring gaps between legal frameworks and practical enforcement.^[193]^[194]

Selected Other Nations

Australia employs stringent border controls for asylum seekers arriving by boat, including mandatory detention and offshore processing in facilities on Nauru and Papua New Guinea, a policy initiated in 2013 that has effectively reduced unauthorized maritime arrivals from over 20,000 in 2013 to near zero annually since.^[195] The country's Humanitarian Program allocates 20,000 places annually for refugees and others in need, primarily through UNHCR referrals and community sponsorships, with over one million such visas issued since World War II as of late 2025.^[196] Recent legislation in 2025 facilitates deportations to third countries like Nauru, imposing up to five years' imprisonment for non-compliance with removal orders, amid efforts to address processing backlogs and deter economic migrants exploiting asylum pathways.^[60] Canada processes asylum claims inland under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, granting refugee status to those meeting Convention criteria or facing personalized risk, with 27,400 permanent residencies awarded to refugees in recent years, mainly from Iran and Nigeria.^[197] The Safe Third Country Agreement with the United States, in effect since 2004, requires most asylum seekers crossing at land borders to claim protection in the first safe country entered, though irregular crossings have prompted increased turnbacks in 2025 despite U.S. deportation risks.^[198] New 2025 legislation strengthens border security by streamlining removals and combating organized migration, while critics argue it undermines non-refoulement by accelerating hearings for repeat claimants.^[199] Asylum seekers receive work and study permits during processing, but face housing and support gaps, with thousands relying on charities.^[200] The United Kingdom handles asylum applications through the Home Office, processing claims based on a well-founded fear of persecution, though a backlog exceeded 100,000 cases in 2024 amid Channel crossings by small boats.^[83] The 2022-2024 Rwanda partnership aimed to deter irregular arrivals by relocating asylum seekers for processing there, but was abandoned in 2024 following legal challenges over safety concerns, with no deportations executed.^[201] The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill introduced in February 2025 enhances enforcement powers, including new offenses for illegal entry and expedited returns, to reduce reliance on hotels for housing claimants and address public order strains from unchecked inflows.^[202] Turkey, invoking a geographical limitation in the 1951 Refugee Convention, grants "temporary protection" to approximately 3.2 million Syrian refugees since 2011, providing access to education, healthcare, and work permits without full refugee status, while hosting 222,000 other asylum seekers.^[203] This non-camp policy allows settlement nationwide, financed largely by the government with EU support, but faces strains from economic pressures and repatriation debates, with policies emphasizing voluntary returns amid declining Syrian conflict.^[204] Non-European asylum seekers from Iraq and Afghanistan undergo individual assessments, though recognition rates remain low due to the limitation excluding them from Convention protections.^[205] Japan maintains one of the world's strictest asylum regimes, recognizing fewer than 1% of applicants—only 202 out of 13,000 in 2023—under the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act, prioritizing national security and cultural homogeneity over expansive intake.^[206] Amendments effective 2023 permit deportation after two failed claims, with 17 such removals by March 2025, deterring serial applications often linked to labor migration rather than genuine persecution.^[207] Detainees face prolonged holds without bail options, exacerbating mental health issues, though the system aligns with low irregular migration inflows compared to Western peers.^[208]

References

[1]
Asylum-seekers | UNHCR
An asylum-seeker is someone who has or intends to apply to be recognized as a refugee, but their application has yet to be processed.
[2]
The 1951 Refugee Convention - UNHCR
Article 1 of the 1951 Convention defines a refugee as someone who "owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, ...
[3]
Global Trends report 2024 - UNHCR
At the end of 2024, 123.2 million people worldwide were forcibly displaced as a result of persecution, conflict, violence, human rights violations and events ...
[4]
EU received over 1.1 million asylum applications in 2023
Feb 28, 2024 · In 2023, the EU+ recognition rate rose to 43 % which is the highest level seen in 7 years. While the rate remained stable for most nationalities ...
[5]
4.14.1.1. Recognition rates at first instance
The overall EU+ recognition rate for first instance decisions on asylum applications was 39% in 2022. This means that out of 646,000 decisions issued, ...
[6]
The U.S. Asylum System in Crisis: Charting a Way Forward
Sep 27, 2018 · This slowdown both harms those eligible for protection and invites abuse, with some claims filed to secure the right to remain and work legally ...
[7]
Asylum and refugee status - UNHCR Frequently asked questions
The 1951 Refugee Convention contains the foundational definition of who is a refugee and outlines the basic rights which countries should afford refugees.
[8]
Migrants, asylum seekers, IDPs, refugees and immigrants
May 15, 2025 · An asylum seeker is someone who is seeking international protection from dangers in his or her home country, but whose claim for refugee status ...
[9]
Refugees and Asylum | USCIS
Aug 27, 2025 · Refugee or asylum status may be granted to aliens who have been persecuted or have a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of ...Asylum · Refugees · Temporary Protected Status
[10]
[PDF] HANDBOOK ON PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA FOR ... - UNHCR
For over 65 years, the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (1951 Convention), com‑ plemented by its 1967 Protocol, has served as the ...
[11]
Convention relating to the Status of Refugees | OHCHR
The Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, adopted in 1951, defines a refugee and covers general provisions, juridical status, employment, welfare, and ...Preamble · Article 1 - Definition of the term... · Article 17 - Wage-earning...
[12]
Asylum in the United States - American Immigration Council
May 9, 2025 · In accordance with U.S. law, to apply for asylum, an individual must be physically present in the United States or arrive at a port of entry.
[13]
Asylum in the EU - Migration and Home Affairs - European Union
The Qualification Regulation sets out the criteria for applicants to qualify for refugee status or subsidiary protection status and sets out the rights ...The Asylum Procedure · The Border Procedures · Who Qualifies For...
[14]
The 1951 Refugee Convention and Key International ... - UNHCR
The 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol define 'refugee', outline rights, and states' obligations, with a core principle of non-refoulement. States ...
[15]
[PDF] 1951 refugee convention 1967 protocol - UNHCR
The 1967 Protocol removed these limitations and thus gave the Convention universal coverage. It has since been supplemented by refu- gee and subsidiary ...
[16]
The 1951 Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol relating ... - UNHCR
The 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol provide the internationally recognized definition of a refugee and outline the legal rights they are entitled ...
[17]
UNHCR Note on the Principle of Non-Refoulement - Refworld
The principle of non-refoulement is the cornerstone of asylum and of international refugee law. Following from the right to seek and to enjoy in other ...
[18]
5. Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees - UNTC
4 October 1967, in accordance with article VIII. Registration, : 4 ... Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees were extended to Suriname.
[19]
Refugees, Asylum Seekers and Migrants - Amnesty International
An asylum seeker is a person who has left their country and is seeking protection from persecution and serious human rights violations in another country, but ...
[20]
Key Migration Terms
Asylum seeker – An individual who is seeking international protection. In countries with individualized procedures, an asylum seeker is someone whose claim has ...
[21]
Migrants, immigrants, refugees, and asylum seekers
Jun 5, 2024 · The distinction between being a refugee and being an asylum seeker is rooted in the legal definitions and application processes ...Who Is A Refugee? · Sudanese Refugees In Chad · Asylum Seekers At The Us...
[22]
Internally Displaced People - UNHCR
Internally displaced people, referred to as IDPs, have been forced to flee their homes by conflict, violence, persecution or disasters, however, they remain ...
[23]
Refugee vs. IDP vs. migrant… what's the difference?
Refugees cross international borders due to fear, while IDPs stay within their country. IDPs are not a legal status, unlike refugees.What Is A Refugee? · What Is An Idp? · What Is A Migrant?
[24]
Protected persons: Migrants, refugees, asylum seekers - ICRC
According to the ICRC's definition, migrants are people who leave or flee their usual place of residence in search of safety or better opportunities abroad, ...
[25]
Displaced Persons and Postwar America - Experiencing History
As a result of World War II and the Holocaust, roughly 11 million people remained uprooted and displaced in Europe after the surrender of Nazi Germany in ...
[26]
What Happened To People Displaced By The Second World War?
One of the largest consequences of the Second World War was the continued displacement of millions of people, with 65 million in Europe alone.<|control11|><|separator|>
[27]
“The Last Million:” Eastern European Displaced Persons in Postwar ...
Apr 4, 2022 · After World War II 1.2 million Eastern European displaced persons refused to return home, creating a large-scale refugee crisis.
[28]
About UNHCR
UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, is a global organization established in 1950 to protect people forced to flee conflict and persecution, and is mandated by the UN.The 1951 Refugee Convention · History of UNHCR · UN and international... · Africa
[29]
What is the 1951 Refugee Convention—and How Does It Support ...
Jul 24, 2021 · The 1951 Refugee Convention defined a new category of protected persons and specified what it means to respect refugees' human rights. The 1951 ...
[30]
10-Minute Talks: The 1951 UN Refugee Convention: its origins and ...
Jul 28, 2021 · Other key provisions extended to basic rights such as employment, as well as housing, education and access to the legal system. I mentioned ...
[31]
OAU Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee ...
OAU Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa ; Date of Adoption: September 10, 1969 ; Date of last signature: May 19, 2016 ; Date ...Missing: Cartagena | Show results with:Cartagena
[32]
[PDF] Cartagena Declaration on Refugees, Colloquium on the ...
To ensure that the countries of the region establish a minimum standard of treatment for refugees, on the basis of the provisions of the 1951 Convention and.
[33]
Timeline - EU migration and asylum policy - Consilium
The timeline on the EU migration policy provides an overview of the key developments in the work of the Council and the European Council in this field.
[34]
European asylum policy before and after the migration crisis
The foundation of existing asylum policies is the 1951 Refugee Convention. It was conceived in the wake of mass displacements in Europe after the Second ...
[35]
Refugees | United Nations
There were 122.6 million people forcibly displaced worldwide at the end of June 2024. Among those were 43.7 million refugees (32 million under UNHCR's ...
[36]
UN Refugee Agency marks 73 years of the Refugee Convention ...
Jul 26, 2024 · This Sunday, 28 July, marks the 73 rd anniversary of the 1951 Refugee Convention, the cornerstone of refugee protection which has saved and protected the lives ...
[37]
An Overview of U.S. Refugee Law and Policy
Apr 24, 2025 · The Cartagena Declaration on Refugees—signed by Mexico, most Central American countries, and many countries in the Caribbean and South America— ...Missing: milestones | Show results with:milestones
[38]
Global Trends - UNHCR
Jun 12, 2025 · There were 8.4 million asylum-seekers awaiting decisions on their individual applications at the end of 2024, the highest number ever recorded, ...Global Trends report 2024 · Global Trends report 2023 · Français
[39]
Global Report 2024 - UNHCR
Jun 17, 2025 · Despite system improvements in many countries, pending asylum applications rose by 22% in 2024, reaching 8.4 million worldwide. During the year, ...
[40]
Full article: The Role of Gender in Asylum Migration to Europe
Jan 12, 2024 · While 50% of displaced individuals worldwide are female, women comprised only 31% of the people seeking asylum in Europe between 2008 and ...
[41]
Refugee Data Finder - Key Indicators - UNHCR
Jun 12, 2025 · At the end of 2024, of the 123.2 million forcibly displaced people, an estimated 49 million (40 per cent) are children below 18 years of age.
[42]
Refugee Statistics - USA for UNHCR
Global Trends At-a-Glance · 42.7 million refugees · 73.5 million internally displaced people · 8.4 million asylum seekers · 5.9 million people in need of ...
[43]
Latest Asylum Trends
Jul 17, 2025 · In May 2025, EU+ asylum authorities received 64,000 asylum applications, a downward trend compared to late 2024. Following the ousting of the ...
[44]
Refugees and asylum-seekers - World Migration Report
At the end of 2022, those under 18 years of age constituted around 41 per cent of the overall 35.3 million refugee population.38 Unaccompanied and separated ...
[45]
Recent developments in international migration movements ... - OECD
Nov 14, 2024 · The number of new asylum seekers to OECD countries broke a new record once again, with 2.7 million new applications registered across OECD ...Missing: temporal | Show results with:temporal
[46]
https://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics/insights/annexes/trends-annexes.html
[47]
Latest Asylum Trends - Annual Analysis
Mar 3, 2025 · In 2024, Turkish asylum applications fell by nearly a half, totalling approximately 56,000 applications and placing Turkish nationals as the ...
[48]
Refugees Annual Flow Reports - Office of Homeland Security Statistics
Aug 20, 2025 · Office of Homeland Security Statistics reports on refugee admissions for FY2004-2024.
[49]
Five Takeaways from the 2024 UNHCR Global Trends Report
including 1.6 million refugees and 8.2 million IDPs. These figures ...
[50]
Mid-Year Trends | UNHCR
Oct 9, 2024 · UNHCR's Mid-Year Trends report presents the latest numbers of refugees, asylum-seekers, internally displaced and stateless persons worldwide.Missing: temporal | Show results with:temporal
[51]
[PDF] global-trends-report-2024.pdf - UNHCR
Jun 12, 2025 · Almost 30,800 of them were registered as asylum-seekers by UNHCR and the remaining 198,000 are estimated based on the issuance of health cards ...
[52]
Asylum applications down by 23% in the first half of 2025
Sep 8, 2025 · By the end of June 2025, EU+ countries received 399 000 asylum applications, a 23 % decrease compared to the first half of 2024.1 This shift was ...<|separator|>
[53]
Asylum statistics - House of Commons Library - UK Parliament
Sep 1, 2025 · The latest available data shows a further increase in the number of asylum applications to 88,700 in the year to June 2025, relating to 111,100 ...
[54]
World Report 2025: European Union | Human Rights Watch
EU migration and asylum policy increasingly focuses on deadly deterrence, illustrated in 2024 by new rules that seriously undermine the rights of migrants and ...
[55]
Overview of the main changes since the previous report update
Jun 16, 2025 · Key changes include (see Detention of Asylum Seekers):. Asylum applicants can now be detained if grounds for detention existed when they ...
[56]
Illegal border crossings plunge in 2025 amid Trump crackdown
Oct 8, 2025 · U.S. Border Patrol recorded roughly 238,000 migrant apprehensions in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, down from more than 1.5 million ...
[57]
Migrant Crossings at the Darien Gap Continue to Plummet ...
Jul 31, 2025 · DHS announced migrant crossings at the Darien Gap have dropped 99.98% for the months of May and June 2025 compared to a peak under the Biden ...Missing: seekers | Show results with:seekers
[58]
CBP Releases May 2025 Monthly Update
Jun 17, 2025 · CBP's total number of encounters nationwide, including at ports of entry, averaged approximately 952 per day in May 2025—a 2% decrease from ...Missing: seekers | Show results with:seekers
[59]
Asylum | USCIS
Oct 17, 2025 · ALERT: On Oct. 1, 2025, we began sending notices to all aliens with a pending Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of ...Obtaining Asylum in the United... · The Affirmative Asylum Process · Asylum Bars
[60]
Anti-Fairness Bill's passing marks the beginning of Australia's next ...
Sep 4, 2025 · The new legislation – rushed through Parliament in one week – allows the Government to forcibly deport people without warning, regardless of ...
[61]
World Report 2025: Australia | Human Rights Watch
In November, the government passed new laws that grant it the authority to pay third-party countries to accept non-citizens, including recognized refugees, seek ...
[62]
Labor holds permanent migration numbers steady in wake of protest
Sep 2, 2025 · A total of 185,000 permanent visas will be available in 2025-26. The decision comes in the wake of nationwide anti-immigration protests attended ...
[63]
The largest refugee crises to know in 2025 - Concern Worldwide
Jun 17, 2025 · In the last ten years, that population has nearly doubled, with 31 million refugees recorded in the organization's 2025 report.
[64]
UNHCR – Guidance on Registration and Identity Management
Registration should be physically, economically and socially accessible to all asylum-seekers and refugees within three months of their arrival on a territory.
[65]
EU Screening Regulation: closing gaps in border control while ...
Jun 28, 2024 · The screening procedure will involve six elements: (a) preliminary health and vulnerability checks; (b) identification or verification of ...
[66]
Questions and Answers: Credible Fear Screening | USCIS
Jan 10, 2025 · A credible fear of persecution is a “significant possibility” that you can establish in an Asylum Merits Interview before an asylum officer or ...
[67]
A new screening regulation - consilium.europa.eu
EU screening rules ensure that all persons subject to screening are swiftly referred to the relevant procedure – asylum or return – at the border or away from ...
[68]
Credible Fear Screenings - Asylum - USCIS
Jan 24, 2025 · You must be referred to an asylum officer for an interview to determine whether you have a credible fear of persecution or torture.Missing: initial | Show results with:initial
[69]
[PDF] Tell Me About: The 'Enhanced Screening Process'
The enhanced screening process involves interviews with two officers to identify claims that engage Australia's non-refoulement obligations, and may lead to ...
[70]
[PDF] Credible Fear: A Screening Mechanism in Expedited Removal
The credible fear process is a screening in expedited removal where a trained officer assesses if a person has a "significant possibility" of asylum ...
[71]
Refugee status determination - UNHCR
RSD is the legal or administrative process by which governments or UNHCR determine whether a person seeking international protection is considered a refugee.
[72]
[PDF] Procedural Standards - IIHL
for Refugee Status Determination under UNHCR's Mandate. INTRODUCTION. 13. Page 14. UNHCR's Mandate for Refugee. Status Determination (RSD). Refugee Status ...
[73]
Assessing credibility and refugee status: caseworker guidance
Sep 28, 2023 · UK Visas and Immigration guidance on how staff assess the credibility of an asylum claim and grant refugee status.
[74]
Assessment of credibility in claims for refugee protection
Mar 18, 2022 · In assessing credibility, the Board may consider matters such as inconsistencies, contradictions and omissions from the evidence, specialized ...Basing a decision on the... · Relying on trustworthy... · Credibility and no credible...
[75]
[PDF] Practical Guide on Evidence and Risk Assessment
Evidence and risk assessment is a methodology to apply throughout the whole process of examining an asylum claim. Using a structured approach will help you do ...
[76]
Country of Origin Information | European Union Agency for Asylum
The EUAA gathers information about countries of origin, habitual residence, and transit used in procedures for the individual assessment of applications for ...
[77]
The Application of Country of Origin Information in Judicial Refugee ...
Oct 11, 2022 · This study investigates how country of origin information (COI) is used in judicial RSD decisions, taking decisions of Germany's Higher Administrative Courts ...
[78]
Medical Evaluations of Asylum Seekers - AMA Journal of Ethics
The purpose of the medical evaluation of asylum applicants is to provide expert opinion on the degree to which medical findings correlate with the applicant's ...
[79]
Validity of Psychiatric Evaluation of Asylum Seekers through ...
Feb 10, 2021 · The goal of the psychiatric assessment of asylum seekers is to evaluate the asylum seeker's mental health and credibility.
[80]
[PDF] Study on Language Assessment for Determination of Origin
Language assessment for the determination of origin (LADO) is a tool used by several asylum and immigration departments to assist with the determination of ...
[81]
[PDF] Language analysis - GOV.UK
Oct 16, 2025 · Country knowledge must always be properly explored in the asylum interview, regardless of the LA results. See also Nationality: disputed, ...
[82]
[PDF] Asylum Decision Rates by Nationality1
1 Asylum rates for Fiscal Year 2023. Data generated on October 12, 2023 ... COUNTRY. 96. 36%. 35. 10%. 10. 53%. 51. SUDAN. *. *. 11. *. *. *. *. SURINAME.Missing: recognition | Show results with:recognition
[83]
Asylum and refugee resettlement in the UK - Migration Observatory
Aug 1, 2025 · In 2024, Sudanese asylum seekers had the highest initial grant rate among the top nationalities (99%) while Indian nationals had the lowest (2%).
[84]
What are the chances of being granted asylum? - Refugees Welcome
For the first 8 months of 2025, the recognition rate in total was 41%. In 2024, the recognition rate for the main nationalities was: Afghanistan: 83%, Syria: ...
[85]
Top facts from the latest statistics on refugees and people seeking ...
Here are our top facts based on the UK Government's latest immigration statistics for the year ending March 2025.Missing: recognition | Show results with:recognition
[86]
Asylum decisions - annual statistics - Statistics Explained - Eurostat
Apr 11, 2025 · In 2024, EU countries granted protection status to 437 900 asylum seekers, up 6.9% compared with 2023 (409 530).
[87]
Access to territory and non-refoulement | UNHCR
Mar 6, 2025 · The principle of non-refoulement is set out, inter alia, in Article 33(1) of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 ...Overview · Relevance for emergency... · Main guidance
[88]
[PDF] Labor Market Access and Outcomes for Refugees
The 1951 Refugee Convention, signed by 146 countries, guarantees refugees the right to work, freedom of movement, access to services, and more.
[89]
[PDF] The Right to Work of Asylum Seekers and Refugees - ASILE Project
May 10, 2021 · Part II analysis the right to work of asylum seekers and refugees, specifically examining the right under international human rights law of ...<|separator|>
[90]
[PDF] REFUGEE EMPLOYMENT - The World Bank
(UNHCR) in 2023 live in countries where they have restricted access to formal employment.1 Meanwhile, businesses in many regions are facing labor shortages.
[91]
2022 Global Refugee Work Rights Report
Jul 28, 2022 · Approximately 28 percent of the global refugee population lives in a country where access to wage employment in practice has improved, while 29 ...
[92]
[PDF] The Right to Work for Asylum Applicants in the EU
For asylum applicants specifically, the Reception Conditions Directive (RCD) requires MS to permit asylum applicants to access the labour market no later than ...
[93]
The new EU Reception Conditions Directive: More welfare ...
To conclude, the new Directive increases Member States' possibilities to subject asylum seekers to significant state control, by making access to the full set ...
[94]
I-765, Application for Employment Authorization - USCIS
Sep 24, 2025 · Applicants must submit the new fees with benefit requests postmarked on or after July 22, 2025. USCIS will reject any form postmarked on or ...Direct Filing Addresses · Checklist of Required Initial... · Employment Authorization
[95]
Temporary health care coverage: Who is eligible and for how long
Jul 22, 2025 · As a refugee (asylum) claimant, you'll get IFHP coverage if: you are waiting for a decision on whether your claim is eligible to be referred to ...
[96]
What kind of support do government-assisted refugees get?
Canada provides income support under the RAP to eligible refugees who cannot pay for their own basic needs. Support can include a: one-time household start-up ...
[97]
[PDF] Policy Paper - Jobs and Skills - Asylum Seeker Resource Centre
All people seeking asylum in Australia should be granted ongoing bridging visas with mainstream social services including the right to work, and the right to ...
[98]
Asylum seekers and refugees | Australian Human Rights Commission
Australia has obligations to protect the human rights of all asylum seekers and refugees who arrive in Australia, regardless of how or where they arrive.
[99]
Refugees' Work Rights Around the World: Introducing Our New Report
Jul 28, 2022 · We describe the extent to which refugees have the right to work, both in law (de jure) and in practice (de facto), in 51 countries.
[100]
[PDF] Detention Guidelines | UNHCR
These Guidelines reflect the state of international law relating to detention – on immigration-related grounds – of asylum-seekers and other persons seeking.
[101]
Global Detention Project | Mapping immigration detention around ...
The world's leading research centre for immigration detention as response to migration and refugee movements; promoting respect for the rights of detainees.United States · GDP Staff · Detention Centres · The Immigration Detention...
[102]
[PDF] Snapshot of ICE Detention - National Immigrant Justice Center
The U.S. government spends over three billion a year on the largest immigration detention apparatus in the world to detain and deport people.
[103]
Duration in Immigration Detention and Health Harms - JAMA Network
Jan 24, 2025 · As of December 2023, the average length of detention in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody was about 52 days, although ...
[104]
Australia's asylum policies - Refugee Council of Australia
Mar 27, 2024 · However, in November 2023, the High Court found that there were some constitutional limits on immigration detention.
[105]
Pact on Migration and Asylum
The Pact on Migration and Asylum is a set of new rules managing migration and establishing a common asylum system at EU level.
[106]
[PDF] Asylum Report 2025
Jun 30, 2025 · The Asylum Report 2025 is an annual report on the situation of asylum in the European Union, published in June 2025.
[107]
Fiscal cost of refugees in Europe - CEPR
Jan 28, 2016 · The current net redistribution from the non-refugee population to refugees (excluding arrivals in 2015) is estimated to be 1.35% of GDP.
[108]
Access to the labour market - Asylum Information Database
Jun 16, 2025 · For most adult asylum-seekers, in practice the time-limit before accessing employment is now 18 months, up to 24 months in some Federal States.
[109]
[PDF] THE FISCAL IMPACT OF REFUGEES AND ASYLEES AT THE ...
Feb 2, 2024 · The analysis showed that the reduction in refugee arrivals over the period cost the U.S. economy $9.1 billion per year from the gross domestic ...
[110]
[PDF] The fiscal lifetime cost of receiving refugees - EconStor
The average annual fiscal net contribution over a refugee's lifetime ranges from -12% to -22% of GDP per capita, based on origin countries.<|separator|>
[111]
[PDF] The Long-Term Fiscal Impact of Immigrants in the Netherlands ...
Dec 22, 2024 · We use very detailed microdata on fiscal contributions and benefits of the entire population to calculate the discounted lifetime net ...
[112]
[PDF] PROJECTING THE NET FISCAL IMPACT OF IMMIGRATION IN THE ...
This report provides an analysis of the fiscal impact of migration in the European Union in the past and the future. It highlights that currently natives ...
[113]
Characteristics and Economic Impact of Migrants and Refugees in ...
Dec 22, 2023 · Social security contributions represent the main sources of fiscal revenue (0.9 percent of GDP), whereas health and education are the main ...
[114]
The High Cost of Refugee Employment Bans - Immigration Policy Lab
KEY FINDING. Asylum seekers who had to wait 7 months longer before entering the labor market were 20% less likely to be employed five years later.
[115]
[PDF] The Labor Demand Effects of Refugee Immigration: Evidence from a ...
One newly arrived asylum seeker increases local employment by 0.42 in the short run. Put differently, 2.4 additional refugees increase local employment by one ...
[116]
Macroeconomic evidence suggests that asylum seekers are not a ...
Jun 20, 2018 · This paper aims to evaluate the economic and fiscal effects of inflows of asylum seekers into Western Europe from 1985 to 2015.
[117]
[PDF] Do Migrants Pay Their Way? A Net Fiscal Analysis for Germany
Nov 21, 2024 · Abstract. This study quantifies the direct average net fiscal impact (ANFI) of migra- tion in Germany, taking into account both indirect ...
[118]
Update of the Commission's 2020 study projecting the net fiscal ...
May 21, 2025 · This study shows that non-EU immigration has a negative net benefit in almost all countries, even under the assumption of 'perfect integration'.
[119]
Access to language training and the local integration of refugees
This paper examines whether language classes raise refugees' language proficiency and improve their socio-economic integration.
[120]
The relationship between employment and health for people ... - NIH
However, refugees and asylum seekers face unique barriers entering the labour market including discrimination, language barriers, lack of local experience ...
[121]
Combining Language Training and Work Experience for Refugees ...
Mar 25, 2023 · Especially language proficiency is a key barrier for the integration of low literates. Often language training and gaining work skills are ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[122]
Empirical evidence on how asylum waiting time undermines refugee ...
Jun 18, 2021 · The findings show longer asylum waiting time is associated with poor health. Female refugees were more likely to report poor emotional and physical health.
[123]
Ethnic segregation: boon or bane for cultural integration?
Feb 24, 2014 · Very high levels of residential ethnic clustering strengthens immigrants retaining strong ties to their respective country of origin.Missing: migrant | Show results with:migrant
[124]
Immigration Diversity and Social Cohesion - Migration Observatory
Dec 13, 2019 · This briefing discusses the meaning, dimensions, measurement and determinants of social cohesion. Drawing on research in the US, UK and other European ...
[125]
How reception centers affect the integration of asylum seekers and ...
We provide descriptive evidence suggesting that asylum seekers and refugees move to relatively more disadvantaged neighborhoods after leaving reception centers.
[126]
[PDF] THE IMPACTS OF MIGRATION ON SOCIAL COHESION AND ...
A society that is integrated across immigrants and non- immigrants may for instance not have a strong sense of national identity. A shared sense of national.
[127]
Welfare-Dependent Refugees?: Evidence from County Welfare ...
May 18, 2021 · This study tests an assumption of refugee resettlement policy: Refugees are dependent on welfare. Using administrative data from a county government,
[128]
Welfare Use by Immigrants and the U.S.-Born
Dec 19, 2023 · Assuming our estimates are correct, the SIPP data indicates that use of the welfare system by illegal immigrant households is extremely common.
[129]
[PDF] Migrants and Welfare Dependency: Evidence from the EU
The analysis of unconditional dependence shows that being an Extra-EU immigrant is associated with a lower probability of receiving contributory benefits.
[130]
Do refugees impact crime? Causal evidence from large-scale ...
Our results indicate that crime rates were not affected during the year of refugee arrival, but there was an increase in crime rates one year later.
[131]
The crime effect of refugees | CEPR
Jul 24, 2022 · This column finds that the increase in the refugee population in Turkey led to an increase in the incidence of crime of between 2% and 4.75% per year.
[132]
The effect of 3.6 million refugees on crime - ScienceDirect.com
In this paper, we examine the causal link between immigration and crime in the context of the arrival in Turkey of 3.6 million Syrian refugees.
[133]
Migrants and Crime in Sweden in the Twenty-First Century | Society
Jan 13, 2020 · In 2017, 58% of suspects for total crime in Sweden were migrants, with 73% for murder/manslaughter. Non-registered migrants are linked to 13% ...
[134]
(PDF) Migrants and Crime in Sweden in the Twenty-First Century
Regarding murder, manslaughter and attempted murder, the figures are 73 per cent, while the proportion of robbery is 70 per cent. Non-registered migrants are ...
[135]
Cologne attacks' profound impact on Europe - BBC News
Jan 11, 2016 · Cologne attacks' profound impact on Europe · Women describe 'terrible' assaults · Cologne mayor's 'code of conduct' attacked · The search for ...
[136]
New Year's Eve in Cologne: 5 years after the mass assaults - DW
Dec 31, 2020 · New Year's Eve in Cologne: 5 years after the mass assaults. Ralf ... Tightening of asylum and sexual assault laws. As a result of the ...
[137]
New Year's assaults stoke tensions over migrants in Germany - PBS
Jan 8, 2016 · The attacks have polarized public opinion in Germany over its open door policy, which has seen it take in more than a million asylum seekers ...
[138]
Asylum Hotels: Migrant Criminal Activity - Hansard - UK Parliament
Jul 21, 2025 · The Mail on Sunday found 708 charges based on only a third of those hotels. Those crimes included multiple cases of rape, sexual assault, ...
[139]
Does Immigration Induce Terrorism? | The Journal of Politics
The results suggest that migrants stemming from terrorist-prone states moving to another country are indeed an important vehicle through which terrorism does ...
[140]
Terrorism in the EU: facts and figures - Consilium
The report provides figures on terrorist attacks and terrorism-related arrests in the European Union and is based on information provided by EU member states.
[141]
Is immigration a threat to UK security? - Migration Watch UK
May 1, 2024 · This paper finds that substantial inflows, particularly of asylum seekers, can increase the likelihood of terrorist attacks and communal violence.Summary · Introduction · Community relations · Terrorism
[142]
NSA 2025 - Organised Immigration Crime - National Crime Agency
There has been a significant increase in migrant fatalities as organised criminals seek to maximise profits from small boat crossings.
[143]
Facts about migration, integration and crime in Sweden
Oct 6, 2025 · In 2022, 391 shootings occurred, in which 107 people were injured. The corresponding figures for 2017 were 281 shootings and 128 injured.
[144]
Twelve People Charged for Their Roles in International Alien ...
Sep 4, 2025 · Twelve people have been charged in a superseding indictment for their roles in an international conspiracy involving alien smuggling, asylum ...
[145]
5 indicted in large-scale immigration fraud scheme orchestrated by ...
Nov 18, 2024 · Authorities have identified several dozen aliens who improperly received immigrations benefits, but that number is growing as the investigation ...
[146]
Broward Woman Charged in Scheme to Submit Fraudulent Asylum ...
Mar 12, 2025 · Andrea C. Correa, 37, a resident of Sunrise, Florida, was arraigned this week on a federal indictment charging her with submission of a fraudulent asylum ...
[147]
Phony Immigration Attorney Who Filed Hundreds of Fraudulent ...
Apr 13, 2021 · Phony Immigration Attorney Who Filed Hundreds of Fraudulent Asylum Applications Sentenced to More Than 20 Years in Federal Prison. Archived ...
[148]
Lawyer Sentenced in Manhattan Federal Court to Five Years in ... - FBI
Nov 13, 2014 · Lawyer Sentenced in Manhattan Federal Court to Five Years in Prison in Connection with Leadership of Asylum Fraud Ring.
[149]
Asylum Grant Rates Decline by a Third - TRAC
Nov 19, 2024 · The latest case-by-case Court records for October 2024 show asylum grant rates had declined to just 35.8 percent. This is in down sharply from earlier in the ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[150]
Asylum Denial Rate Reaches All Time Low - TRAC
So far this year, it has dropped further so that only five out of every ten (50%) asylum requests are being denied. See Figure 1 and Table 1. Figure 2. Volume ...
[151]
The Asylum Denial Machine - Austin Kocher | Substack
Jun 19, 2025 · In April, immigration judges set two alarming records by closing over 11,000 asylum cases and denying 80% of them in a single month.
[152]
Fact Sheet: Asylum Fraud and Immigration Court Absentia Rates
Oct 8, 2021 · An increasing number of asylum applicants are those fleeing gang-related violence or domestic abuse in Central America, experiences for which ...
[153]
Source of asylum claims in 2024 - GOV.UK
Mar 30, 2025 · The published statistics report that in 2023, around 30% of the 92,000 asylum claims in that year were from individuals who arrived in the UK ...Missing: EU | Show results with:EU
[154]
Affirmative Asylum Backlog Exceeds One Million for the First Time
Jul 26, 2024 · Notably, USCIS failed to adjudicate an astounding 97 percent of the affirmative asylum claims received in FY 2022 and FY 2023 within 180 days of ...
[155]
Affirmative Asylum Interview Scheduling - USCIS
Mar 29, 2024 · The aim is to deter individuals from using the asylum backlog solely to obtain employment authorization by filing frivolous, fraudulent, or ...
[156]
[PDF] Integrating Refugees into Host Country Labor Markets
▫ Removing barriers to entering work or education—but without creating incentives for economic migrants to exploit the asylum route. ▫ Making the case for ...
[157]
DHS and DOJ Issue Third-Country Asylum Rule - Homeland Security
Jul 15, 2019 · ... failing to seek urgent protection in the first available country ... This Rule will decrease forum shopping by economic migrants and ...
[158]
Statistics on countries responsible for asylum applications (Dublin ...
The objective is to avoid asylum seekers being sent from 1 country to another and also to prevent abuse of the system by the submission of several applications ...
[159]
[PDF] Examining Three Decades of Safe Third Country Agreements in ...
Mar 3, 2021 · including the mitigation of “asylum shopping,” where asylum ... Europe” is “grounded in the Dublin Regulation's failure to distribute ...
[160]
Asylum seekers in Europe: where do people go and why?
Sep 21, 2023 · First-time asylum seekers are concentrated in a few European countries (see Figure 1). Germany, the UK, Sweden, Italy and France attract the majority of people ...
[161]
The Determinants of Refugees' Destinations - ScienceDirect.com
This paper examines the determinants of the destination choice of first time non-EU asylum applicants to the EU, between 2008–2020.
[162]
A Primer on Family Reunification/Chain Migration - Georgetown Law
Under our plan, we focus on the immediate family by limiting sponsorships to spouses and minor children. This vital reform is necessary, not just for our ...Missing: asylum | Show results with:asylum
[163]
Understanding Asylum Cases Statistics in the U.S. - Jeelani Law Firm
Jul 7, 2025 · U.S. law sets a high evidentiary standard, and many claims—especially those based on general violence or poverty—don't meet legal criteria.Missing: Europe | Show results with:Europe
[164]
Asylum Reform, Not Troops, Is the Solution to Current Border Reality
As a result, application levels dropped dramatically and approval rates rose—indicating that the reforms disincentivized dubious claims. The asylum system ...
[165]
The U.S. Must Redesign Asylum Law for 21st-Century Reality and ...
Mar 31, 2025 · The post–World War II refugee and asylum process no longer serves national interests and needs significant reforms for integrity, security, and US sovereignty.
[166]
Senators unveil bipartisan bill to impose tougher asylum and border ...
Feb 4, 2024 · The $118 billion package includes a series of provisions aimed at reducing record high crossings at the southern border and tightening an asylum system.
[167]
The Surprising New Consensus on Asylum Reform - AEI
Sep 30, 2025 · Asylum, he argued, has mutated into a channel for mass economically-motivated immigration that has come to “supplant the migration laws.” “I ...
[168]
What Americans think would improve the U.S. immigration system
Feb 15, 2024 · Half or more say increasing the number of judges to process asylum applications (60%), creating more opportunities for people to legally immigrate (56%), and ...
[169]
A New Immigration System To Safeguard America's Security ...
Jul 6, 2025 · Hold employers accountable that exploit the outdated immigration system to increase their profits against the interests of American workers.
[170]
Resistant to Reform? Improving U.S. Immigration Policy Through ...
Aug 28, 2024 · This paper begins by outlining a range of innovations that rely on data and algorithmic tools to advance refugee resettlement and immigrant placement.
[171]
How effective are integration policy reforms? The case of asylum ...
Research has neglected the effect of integration policy reform packages combining economic and social policy measures on asylum‐related immigrants' adjustment ...Missing: competing | Show results with:competing
[172]
Global Refugee Asylum System: What Went Wrong and How to Fix It
Sep 25, 2025 · Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau at the Panel “Global Refugee Asylum System: What Went Wrong and How to Fix It”.<|separator|>
[173]
Asylum has become a parallel immigration system. Here's how to fix ...
and provide a template — for one.
[174]
To What Extent Does Asylum Policy Match Public Policy Preferences?
Jun 6, 2024 · We test whether current asylum policies align with public opinion in Britain using an original conjoint experiment with realistic policy choices ...
[175]
8 U.S. Code § 1158 - Asylum - Law.Cornell.Edu
The Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General may grant asylum to an alien who has applied for asylum in accordance with the requirements and ...
[176]
[PDF] Asylees: 2023 - Office of Homeland Security Statistics
Oct 1, 2024 · The United States provided protection to 54,350 asylees during 2023,3 including 22,300 individuals who were granted asylum affirmatively by U.S ...
[177]
Immigration Court Quick Facts - TRAC
At the end of August 2025, out of the total backlog of 3,432,519 cases, 2,271,857 immigrants have already filed formal asylum applications and are now waiting ...Missing: 2024 | Show results with:2024
[178]
Migrant Protection Protocols (Trump Administration Archive)
Aliens who are granted relief or protection from removal, including asylum, will be allowed to remain in the United States consistent with existing laws and ...
[179]
Biden administration toughens asylum restrictions at border - PBS
Sep 30, 2024 · The new rules, which double down on restrictions announced in June, bar migrants from being granted asylum when U.S. officials deem that the ...
[180]
Realigning the United States Refugee Admissions Program
Jan 20, 2025 · This order suspends the USRAP until such time as the further entry into the United States of refugees aligns with the interests of the United ...
[181]
Protecting The American People Against Invasion - The White House
Jan 20, 2025 · Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to faithfully execute the immigration laws against all inadmissible and removable aliens, ...
[182]
https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/news-releases/tibetan-man-sentenced-to-27-months-in-prison-for-filing-fraudulent-asylum-claims-for-profit
[183]
Phony immigration attorney filed more than 215 fraudulent asylum ...
March 11, 2020Tampa, FL, United StatesDocument and Benefit Fraud ... Reyes allegedly filed fraudulent immigration applications in the victims' names, ...
[184]
2.1 The Common European Asylum System and current issues
The Common European Asylum System (CEAS) is a legal and policy framework developed to guarantee harmonised and uniform standards for people seeking ...
[185]
2.1. Reforming the Common European Asylum System
CEAS is a legal and policy framework which was developed to guarantee harmonised and uniform standards for people seeking international protection in the EU.
[186]
Country responsible for asylum application (Dublin Regulation)
The objective of the Dublin III Regulation is to ensure quick access to the asylum procedures and the examination of an application on the merits by a single, ...
[187]
Reforming the Common European Asylum System | Topics
Apr 16, 2024 · The EU decided to reform its Common European Asylum System (CEAS) to ensure that all EU countries contribute to asylum management.
[188]
2011/95 - EN - qualification directive - EUR-Lex - European Union
Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or ...
[189]
Regulation (EU) 2024/1347 of the European Parliament ... - Refworld
Regulation (EU) 2024/1347 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2024 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or ...
[190]
Migration and asylum pact - consilium.europa.eu
The Council adopted the EU's pact on migration and asylum on 14 May 2024. This establishes a set of rules that will help to: manage arrivals in an orderly way.
[191]
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Asylum_applications_-_annual_statistics
[192]
What is the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum? | The IRC in the EU
Jul 23, 2024 · The Screening Regulation which determines the initial procedure to be faced by non-EU nationals who arrive irregularly into the EU. The revised ...
[193]
2.2. Key issues in European asylum discourse and practices
Throughout 2024, issues related to migration and asylum continued to feature prominently in the European policy agenda. The EU Strategic Agenda for ...
[194]
Asylum applications - monthly statistics - Statistics Explained - Eurostat
On a quarterly basis, there were 155 980 first-time asylum applicants in the EU countries in Q2 2025, a decrease of 15.8% compared with the previous Q1 2025 ( ...
[195]
[PDF] Vision for the 48th Parliament of Australia
In late 2025, Australia will pass a significant milestone when the Government issues the one millionth permanent refugee or humanitarian visa since its post ...
[196]
Australia's Humanitarian Program 2025-26
Jul 16, 2025 · Australia operates a dedicated Humanitarian Program that offers: resettlement for refugees and others overseas who are in humanitarian need ...
[197]
What Is Canada's Immigration Policy? - Council on Foreign Relations
Canada also granted permanent residency to 27,400 refugees that year, more than any other country. These new residents were predominantly from Iran and Nigeria.Introduction · What role has immigration... · What is Canada's policy on...
[198]
Canada turns back more asylum-seekers to US despite third-country ...
Sep 18, 2025 · Canada's government is sending more asylum-seekers hoping to file claims in Canada back to the U.S. under a bilateral pact, even as the U.S. ...
[199]
Government of Canada introduces new streamlined legislation to ...
Oct 9, 2025 · The Government of Canada has introduced new legislation to strengthen border security, combat organized crime, and modernize immigration ...
[200]
Refugees and asylum - Canada.ca
Sep 22, 2025 · Apply for refugee status from within Canada, find out how to come to Canada as a refugee, sponsor a refugee, find refugee services in Canada, and learn about ...Canada's refugee system · Asylum claims by year · Refugee protection in Canada
[201]
Experts welcome announcement to end UK-Rwanda asylum ... - ohchr
Jul 10, 2024 · “The plan would have externalised the UK's asylum obligations and posed serious human rights risks for migrants, asylum seekers and refugees and ...<|separator|>
[202]
Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill 2025 - GOV.UK
The Bill to create a framework of new and enhanced powers and offences to improve UK border security and to strengthen the asylum and immigration system.
[203]
Refugees and Asylum Seekers in Türkiye | UNHCR Turkey
Türkiye currently hosts some 3.2 million registered Syrian refugees along with close to 222,000 persons of concern from other nationalities. ... In April 2013, ...
[204]
Türkiye - European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations
Jun 23, 2025 · Türkiye hostsalmost 3 million Syrian refugees and approximately 230,000 asylum seekers from different nationalities with most of them facing ...Introduction · What are the needs? · How are we helping?
[205]
[PDF] TURKEY POLICY BRIEF - ICMPD
Due to this geographical limitation to the definition of a refugee, Turkey considers Syrians as temporary protection status holders and other non- European ...
[206]
Japan: Immigration Policy and Visa Requirements in 2025
Jun 23, 2025 · What's the situation regarding refugee/asylum policy in Japan? Japan has a highly restrictive refugee recognition system. In 2023, out of 13, ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[207]
17 applicants deported under stricter refugee recognition law
Mar 15, 2025 · The revisions allow for deportations of foreigners who have twice had their applications for refugee status rejected. Critics said the new rules ...
[208]
Japan Immigration Law Creates New Obstacles for Asylum Seekers
Jun 14, 2023 · The new law allows the Japanese government to deport asylum seekers who apply for refugee status more than twice.