The Issue of Refugee Recognition is Not Explicitly Regulated in Israeli Law<\/strong><\/h4>\nAccording to data from the Population and Immigration Authority<\/a>, there are currently about 30,000 asylum seekers<\/a> living in Israel whose status has not yet been regulated. This is despite the fact that the legal situation in Israel allows for the recognition of many of them as refugees. Israel was among the first countries to join the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 1951<\/a>. The convention and its 1967 protocol stipulate that a state shall not expel or return (“refouler”) a refugee <\/span>to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race,<\/span> religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.<\/span>
\n<\/span>![\"Recognition](\"https:\/\/lawfirmbackup_200125.k1uagm.ap-southeast-2.wpstaqhosting.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/thiago-barletta-pUC8w3j-dro-unsplash-300x200.jpg\")
<\/p>\nIn practice, since Israel’s accession to the convention, no explicit laws have been enacted regulating the process of refugee recognition in Israel. The issue is regulated by procedures of the Population and Immigration Authority, but no specific legislation has yet been established on the subject. This makes the process of refugee recognition complex, and has drawn much criticism from various parties. We will explain the procedure below, and then present court rulings that dealt with the issue.<\/p>\n
How Does the Refugee Recognition Process in Israel Work?<\/strong><\/h4>\nThe Asylum Seekers Procedure<\/a> regulates the manner of examining and handling applications for refugee recognition. The handling is done by a special unit of the Ministry of Interior, called RSD (Refugees Status Determination). Many applications from asylum seekers for recognition as refugees are submitted, but their handling is not always optimal. We have explained in detail in another article the shortcomings in the work of the Population Authority in this regard.<\/p>\nVarious examples of shortcomings in the work of the Population Authority can be found. A common example is deficiencies in the conduct of interviews conducted with asylum seekers as part of the examination of their application. The procedure on the subject stipulates, among other things, that the interview should be conducted in the language of the asylum seekers. If necessary, the interview should be conducted with an interpreter. However, this is not always done. In some cases, the interview is conducted in a language that the asylum seekers know but do not master. This can create many misunderstandings and lead to the rejection of applications for refugee status in Israel, even if they are justified.<\/p>\n
Recognition of an Asylum Seeker as a Refugee Due to Being a Political Activist in Their Country<\/strong><\/h4>\nQuite a few cases of asylum seekers eventually reach the court’s examination. An important example is the case of Sunday Martins<\/a>, who was represented by Adv. Michael Decker<\/a> from our firm. This is an asylum seeker from Nigeria, who filed a petition due to the rejection of his application for recognition as a refugee. This was against the background of his affiliation with the political movement MEND (Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta). This is a political movement belonging to the opposition, many of whose members are persecuted by the authorities because of their affiliation with the movement.<\/p>\nIn this case, the court determined that objective evidence was indeed presented indicating a fear of danger to the life and liberty of the petitioner. However, the evidence was not examined by the authority, claiming a lack of reliability. The Ministry of Interior even argued that this is not a political organization that justifies recognition of refugee status under the convention, contrary to the Supreme Court’s position on the matter. Therefore, in this case, the court ruled that the petitioner’s case should be returned for reconsideration before the Refugee Affairs Committee.<\/p>\n
Additional Cases Where an Application for Refugee Recognition May Be Accepted<\/strong><\/h4>\nAs we explained above, recognition of asylum seekers may be possible if they prove that their lives or freedom will be in danger if they are deported from Israel. This is when the danger to their lives or freedom stems from reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.<\/p>\n
\n<\/span>
<\/p>\nIn practice, since Israel’s accession to the convention, no explicit laws have been enacted regulating the process of refugee recognition in Israel. The issue is regulated by procedures of the Population and Immigration Authority, but no specific legislation has yet been established on the subject. This makes the process of refugee recognition complex, and has drawn much criticism from various parties. We will explain the procedure below, and then present court rulings that dealt with the issue.<\/p>\n
How Does the Refugee Recognition Process in Israel Work?<\/strong><\/h4>\nThe Asylum Seekers Procedure<\/a> regulates the manner of examining and handling applications for refugee recognition. The handling is done by a special unit of the Ministry of Interior, called RSD (Refugees Status Determination). Many applications from asylum seekers for recognition as refugees are submitted, but their handling is not always optimal. We have explained in detail in another article the shortcomings in the work of the Population Authority in this regard.<\/p>\nVarious examples of shortcomings in the work of the Population Authority can be found. A common example is deficiencies in the conduct of interviews conducted with asylum seekers as part of the examination of their application. The procedure on the subject stipulates, among other things, that the interview should be conducted in the language of the asylum seekers. If necessary, the interview should be conducted with an interpreter. However, this is not always done. In some cases, the interview is conducted in a language that the asylum seekers know but do not master. This can create many misunderstandings and lead to the rejection of applications for refugee status in Israel, even if they are justified.<\/p>\n
Recognition of an Asylum Seeker as a Refugee Due to Being a Political Activist in Their Country<\/strong><\/h4>\nQuite a few cases of asylum seekers eventually reach the court’s examination. An important example is the case of Sunday Martins<\/a>, who was represented by Adv. Michael Decker<\/a> from our firm. This is an asylum seeker from Nigeria, who filed a petition due to the rejection of his application for recognition as a refugee. This was against the background of his affiliation with the political movement MEND (Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta). This is a political movement belonging to the opposition, many of whose members are persecuted by the authorities because of their affiliation with the movement.<\/p>\nIn this case, the court determined that objective evidence was indeed presented indicating a fear of danger to the life and liberty of the petitioner. However, the evidence was not examined by the authority, claiming a lack of reliability. The Ministry of Interior even argued that this is not a political organization that justifies recognition of refugee status under the convention, contrary to the Supreme Court’s position on the matter. Therefore, in this case, the court ruled that the petitioner’s case should be returned for reconsideration before the Refugee Affairs Committee.<\/p>\n
Additional Cases Where an Application for Refugee Recognition May Be Accepted<\/strong><\/h4>\nAs we explained above, recognition of asylum seekers may be possible if they prove that their lives or freedom will be in danger if they are deported from Israel. This is when the danger to their lives or freedom stems from reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.<\/p>\n
Various examples of shortcomings in the work of the Population Authority can be found. A common example is deficiencies in the conduct of interviews conducted with asylum seekers as part of the examination of their application. The procedure on the subject stipulates, among other things, that the interview should be conducted in the language of the asylum seekers. If necessary, the interview should be conducted with an interpreter. However, this is not always done. In some cases, the interview is conducted in a language that the asylum seekers know but do not master. This can create many misunderstandings and lead to the rejection of applications for refugee status in Israel, even if they are justified.<\/p>\n
Recognition of an Asylum Seeker as a Refugee Due to Being a Political Activist in Their Country<\/strong><\/h4>\nQuite a few cases of asylum seekers eventually reach the court’s examination. An important example is the case of Sunday Martins<\/a>, who was represented by Adv. Michael Decker<\/a> from our firm. This is an asylum seeker from Nigeria, who filed a petition due to the rejection of his application for recognition as a refugee. This was against the background of his affiliation with the political movement MEND (Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta). This is a political movement belonging to the opposition, many of whose members are persecuted by the authorities because of their affiliation with the movement.<\/p>\nIn this case, the court determined that objective evidence was indeed presented indicating a fear of danger to the life and liberty of the petitioner. However, the evidence was not examined by the authority, claiming a lack of reliability. The Ministry of Interior even argued that this is not a political organization that justifies recognition of refugee status under the convention, contrary to the Supreme Court’s position on the matter. Therefore, in this case, the court ruled that the petitioner’s case should be returned for reconsideration before the Refugee Affairs Committee.<\/p>\n
Additional Cases Where an Application for Refugee Recognition May Be Accepted<\/strong><\/h4>\nAs we explained above, recognition of asylum seekers may be possible if they prove that their lives or freedom will be in danger if they are deported from Israel. This is when the danger to their lives or freedom stems from reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.<\/p>\n
In this case, the court determined that objective evidence was indeed presented indicating a fear of danger to the life and liberty of the petitioner. However, the evidence was not examined by the authority, claiming a lack of reliability. The Ministry of Interior even argued that this is not a political organization that justifies recognition of refugee status under the convention, contrary to the Supreme Court’s position on the matter. Therefore, in this case, the court ruled that the petitioner’s case should be returned for reconsideration before the Refugee Affairs Committee.<\/p>\n