WRITTEN QUESTION E-2947/97 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (17 September 1997)

Subject: Attitude of European Member States to refugees and asylum-seekers from Iran

Is the Commission aware that refugees and asylum-seekers from Iran are treated very differently in the European Member States, with the UK, Denmark and France adopting a mild attitude, the Netherlands and Germany being fairly strict and Sweden even stricter?

Is the Commission aware that, as a result, in the UK, Denmark and France virtually all refugees and asylum-seekers are permitted to remain, while the Netherlands and Germany send some asylum-seekers and refugees back, and Sweden currently sends nearly all of them back?

Does the Commission not agree that the information which the various embassies of the Member States in Iran supply to their capitals ought to be coordinated in such a way that the European Member States treat refugees and asylum-seekers from Iran similarly? What measures can the Commission take to bring about such coordination and uniformity of policy?

What is the Commission's own view of Iran? Is Iran a safe country or should it still be regarded as a country where people with certain political or religious convictions face serious dangers?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (11 November 1997)

The Commission is aware of the difference in recognition rates between the individual Member States. In the last years, applications from Iranian nationals constituted, depending on the Member State, between less than 0.5% and close to 10% of the total number of asylum applications. During the same period, the recognition rate varied between 4% and 80%. On a Community wide basis the recognition rate was 31% over the last four years. According to the United Nations commissioner for refugees (UNHCR), in 1995 some 48 000 Iranians were granted Convention refugee status in Europe, slightly more than in 1994 (47 000). Almost half of all Iranians recognised as refugees under the 1951 Convention were recognised by Germany (23 500 or 49%). If one looks at the granting of both Convention refugee status and the granting of humanitarian status, no less than eight Member States have important recognition rates. Thus, the difference in treatment referred to by the Honourable Member might not be as clear-cut as it seemed.

The common basis for the Member States for asylum status determination is the 1951 Geneva convention relating to the status of refugees. In 1996 the Council also adopted a Joint Position on the harmonized application of the definition of the term 'refugee' in Article 1 of the Geneva convention ((Joint position of 4 March 1996 defined by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the EC Treaty on the harmonized application of the definition of the term 'refugee' in Article 1 of the Geneva convention of 28 July 1951 relating to the status of refugees (OJ L 63/2, 13.3.1996). )). Up to the present, no further instruments on alternative protection, e.g. on humanitarian grounds, have been developed in the Community cooperation. The question of subsidiary forms of protection, is however, included in the Council resolution laying down the priorities for co-operation in the field of justice and home affairs for the period from 1 July 1996 to 30 June 1998 ((OJ C 319/1, 26.10.1996. )).

As the Honourable Member requested, mechanisms for the co-ordination and assessment of country of origin information already exist between the Member States in the framework of the Title VI cooperation. It is one of the tasks of the centre of information, reflection and exchange on asylum (CIREA). This working group of the Council prepares joint reports on the assessment of the situations in third countries based on contributions of the Member States ((See the second report on the activities of CIREA in OJ C 274, 19.9.1996. )). CIREA also normally invites representative of the UNHCR to participate in those assessments. The Commission takes full part in all CIREA deliberations.