Svenska

Only one asylum seeker granted refugee status in Iceland

Only one person has been granted refugee status in Iceland since 1984 because Icelandic authorities insist on asylum-seekers proving individualised persecution.

In Iceland there are mainly two avenues for protection for people fleeing conflict and/or persecution; either asylum in accordance with the Refugee Convention or permits to stay on humanitarian grounds.

A refugee is, according to the Refugee Convention, any person who has fled his or her home country due to a "well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion".

To recognize an asylum-seeker as a refugee, Icelandic asylum authorities generally ask every asylum-seeker to prove "well-founded" fear of individual persecution. Applications from citizens of countries such as Afghanistan, Mauritania and Iraq have been rejected with reference to the fact that the asylum-seeker does not fulfil the criteria of being personally persecuted.

Unsound practice

The international conventions, which the Icelandic legislation and practice is built upon, provide no basis for this individualised persecution criterion. The fact that a number of people are exposed to violations at the same time does not exclude them from protection in accordance with international norms.

As a member of a group of persecuted people, each individual member will typically also be personally persecuted. This is established by the UN Refugee Agency and reiterated most recently in August 2007, when the Agency stated that Iraqis from Central and Southern Iraq should be considered as refugees based on the 1951 Convention criteria.

If Iceland decides not to recognize people fleeing generalised or more targeted forms of violence as Convention refugees, under Icelandic Law they can be considered for protection on humanitarian grounds.

Section 45 of the Act on Foreigners stipulates that it is not permitted to send "a foreigner to an area where he has reasons to fear persecution capable of giving rise to the legal status of a refugee, or if it is not guaranteed that he will not be transferred to such an area.

A foreigner who for reasons similar to those giving rise to the legal status of a refugee is in imminent danger of losing his life or being subjected to inhumane treatment shall be granted similar protection."

This provision reflects Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, while the practice of the European Court of Human Rights is not to ask for proof of individualised persecution, the Icelandic authorities insist that every asylum-seeker has to be individually at risk of violations.

In practice, Icelandic authorities are extremely reluctant to grant asylum seekers protection of any kind.

Limited protection

The implications of the Icelandic criteria of individualised persecution and its application is a critical protection gap in relation to two groups; those who apply for asylum because they belong to a group of persecuted people, and those who seek protection because they arbitrarily have been caught in a situation of generalized and indiscriminate violence.

When asylum-seekers are refused protection, lack of "individualized persecution" is generally to blame even though this criterion is based on an unjustified, unsound interpretation, and administration, of relevant international standards.

Hence, there is an urgent need for a more reasonable interpretation of the existing laws to bring interpretation and practice in accordance with the international obligations undertaken by the Icelandic government.

Furthermore, adequate resources must be secured for those bodies concerned with processing asylum applications. In addition, the adoption of legal provisions setting out protection for persons fleeing indiscriminate violence and gross human rights violations is recommended to adequately secure protection for those fleeing generalized violence.

Rejected asylum-seekers who cannot be returned receive extended temporary residence and work permits. These are granted for four to six months at a time and there is no limit for how many times they can be extended.

In practice, this leads to asylum-seekers living in limbo for years on end as such permits grant the holder no rights beyond a legal residence and the right to work; there is no right to family reunification, travel documents or placement in a municipality.

The Icelandic authorities have recently committed to receiving a number of refugees for resettlement every year in cooperation with UNHCR, the Red Cross and municipalities in Iceland. Hopefully, those arriving in Iceland seeking asylum from persecution and armed conflict will also receive protection based on a more generous interpretation of domestic and international standards in the future.