Country of Origin Information COI novembre 2017

1. Country of Origin Information COI novembre 2017

2. Current references EASO Judicial Practical Guide on COI (december 2017) Evidence and credibility assessment in the context of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) – A Judicial Analysis (Produced by IARLJ-Europe under contract to EASO) (be available soon) ACCORD (Austrian Red Cross) Researching Country of origin Information – Training Manual, 2013 edition EASO Country of Origin Information report methodology (2012) Country Information in Asylum Procedures (quality as a legal Requirement in the EU – Gabor Gyulai) (2011)

3. What is COI? COI refers to information about the country of origin or of former habitual residence of an applicant which is used in procedures for determining claims for IP COI is key to IP decision-making but COI is information; it is not guidance for decision-making COI is not specifically defined in the CEAS Instruments

4. Directive QD recast 2011/95/EU Article 4 (…) : 3. The assessment of an application for international protection is to be carried out on an individual basis and includes taking into account: (a) all relevant facts as they relate to the country of origin at the time of taking a decision on the application, including laws and regulations of the country of origin and the manner in which they are applied;

5. Directive APD (recast) 2013/32/EU Article 10 (…) : 3. Member States shall ensure that decisions by the determining authority on applications for international protection are taken after an appropriate examination. To that end, Member States shall ensure that : (…) (b) precise and up-to-date information is obtained from various sources, such as EASO and UNHCR and relevant international human rights organisations, as to the general situation prevailing in the countries of origin of applicants and, where necessary, in countries through which they have transited, and that such information is made available to the personnel responsible for examining applications and taking decisions;

6. Role of COI Preparation stage for an applicant’s asylum interview and checking facts COI may not be relevant to the same degree in every case

7. Role of COI • Typical topics of COI research • the situation and treatment of members of ethnic or religious groups • the existence of certain laws and their application in practice • treatment of perceived government opponents • incidents such as demonstrations, post-election or sectarian violence • cultural practices • the living conditions of specific groups or discrimination against certain groups • geographical details • information on specific events described in the applicant’s statement

8. Where COI is needed? • Practices vary as how COI comes to be placed before judges in refugee and protection cases • Adversarial systems often depend on the parties submitting such materials • Judges in inquisitorial systems, however, may obtain COI by their own initiative, usually with the help of dedicated staff/research units/trained specialists • Other systems mix the two approaches and are sometimes able, in important cases, to hold a preliminary hearing at which the parties are notified of relevant country materials and are asked to cover them in their submissions.

9. Courts or tribunals need reliable COI to evaluate • the objective situation in an applicant’s country of origin; • whether an applicant’s claim is credible in the light of that objective situation; • the circumstances that an applicant claims forced him to flee his country and seek protection; • the laws and regulations in a country and how they are applied; • the risk on return; • whether a state can provide effective protection; • whether an applicant would not be at risk in a part of a state to which he can reasonably be expected to go; • whether there is evidence that an individual should be excluded from international protection; and • whether there is evidence that a person no longer has need for international protection.

10. What is a « source »? The term « source » is used in many different ways A source A primary source An original source A secondary source Sources of information

11. Typology of COI Reports from international and intergovernmental organisations Reports from international NGOs Reports from national bodies and local NGOs Media sources Legislative and administrative bodies (in countries of origin) Academic material, journal/press, media reports Specialised sources (think tanks, analytical networks) Non-IT-based sources (maps, encyclopaedias, yearbooks)

12. Social media Social media are « evolving technological tools through which users create and share news, content and information » More databases than traditional sources of COI Significant dangers

13. Anonymous sources • As a general rule, sources of information should be named. • However, there may be situations where this is not possible, for instance where a primary source has been contacted directly by the author and their personal security may be put at risk by publication of their details. • The ECtHR gave a guidance when it dealt in Sufi and Elmi (Somalia)with ‘the weight to be attached to country reports which primarily rely on information provided by anonymous sources’.

14. main public COI databases European Country of Origin Information Network (ECOI) http://www.ecoi.net/ Refworld (UNHCR) http://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain EASO COI Portal https://coi.easo.europa.eu/ Asylum Information Database (AIDA by ECRE) www.asylumineurope.org

15. Practical use of COI • COI is essential for an appropriate examination of applicants for international protection by determining authorities as well as for thefulfilment of the task of courts and tribunals • Courts and tribunals examining facts and points of law will need it in order to assess the evidence • For courts and tribunals concerned only with points of law, it will be important to consider whether the determining authority or court below has applied proper criteriain making use of and assessing COI • COI is furthermore needed at both stages of their respective assessment: • Establishment of past and present circumstances of the applicant first • Followed by the risk assessment

16. Evaluating COI • Members of courts and tribunals have to assess the COI provided by COI-researchers or by the parties before they decide the case. • Judicial checklists can help to make a proper assessment

17. Quality standards and general principles There are several standards to obey: - Neutrality and objectivity - Usability - Validity - transparency and publicity - quality control General principles - selecting sources - Searching for original/primary/multiple sources - hierarchy of sources - Corroboration of information and balancing the information

18. Independance • To qualify as COI it is essential that the source of information has no vested interest in the outcome of the individual claim for IP • But the absence of vested interest does not necessarily imply neutrality or impartiality

19. ECtHR’s criteria for assessing COI 1 Independence of the source 2 Reliability of the source 3 Objectivity of the source 4 Reputation of the author 5 Methodology of compilation 6 Consistency of conclusions 7 Corroboration by other sources

20. IARLJ’s checklist of judicial criteria for assessing COI (I) Relevance and adequacy of the information How relevant is the COI in the case in hand? Does the COI source adequately cover the relevant issue(s)? How current or temporally relevant is the COI

21. IARLJ’s checklist (II) • Source of the information • Is the COI material satisfactorily sourced? • Is the COI based on publicly available and accessible sources? • Has the COI been prepared on an empirical basis using sound methodology?

22. IARLJ’s checklist (III) • Nature / type of the information • Does the COI exhibit impartiality and independence? • Is the COI balanced and not overly selective? • Prior judicial scrutiny • Has there been judicial scrutiny of the COI by other national courts of the COI in question?

23. Criteria of source assessment • Who provides the information? • What information is provided? • Why is the source providing this information? • How is the information generated? • When was the information gathered and when it was provided?

24. COI questions 1. Is the source independent? 2. Is the source reliable? 3. Is the source objective? 4. Whatis the author’s reputation? 5. Is the methodology sound? 6. Are the conclusions consistent? 7. Are other sources used as corroboration? 8. Is the COI relevant and adequate? 9. Is the COI up to date and/or temporally relevant?

25. Limits and warnings COI is neither a prerequisite for deciding a case nor it is sufficient by itself Determining risk on return is a matter for the members of courts and tribunals; COI is a means to that end Care need to be taken in assessing whether what appears to be evidence from many sources is in fact from just one source Some research possibilities in a country of origin could be restricted The fact that reports on certain accounts are unavailable does not necessary mean that those situations/events did not happen Beware of unreliable translations

26. Language • Language is a significant factor regarding access to and evaluation of COI • Most members of courts and tribunals depend on either translated and/or summarised reports on facts and events, since either the language of a country of origin is not accessible and/or they do not speak the language of major COI reports. • The biggest quantity of COI is available in English, some in French and other languages, depending on the working language of NGOs or the work of national COI units.

27. Mohammad محمد Can be written in several different ways in English like: Mohammad Mohamed Mohammed

28. Asking COI questions Question : relevance Sources: Reliability and balance Research: Accuracy and currency Presentation: Transparency and traceability

29. Asking COI questions • If you are a member of a court or tribunal that formulates questions relevant for COI research, such a formulation will depend on the situation and the complexity of the case at hand • When formulating research questions, it is important to have the applicant in mind • The way you ask a question can influence what kind of information can be gathered. • The question you will ask almost always fits into one of these categories: • Protection-related questions • Credibility questions

30. En Conclusion… Neutrality and impartiality Equality of arms as regards access to information Using public information Data protection

31. COI viewed from the national perspective Long standing use of COI 1995 :creation of a specific geo-political unit for the Court (the Refugee Board of Appeal) and a department on legal issues Since 2013 their competences have been taken up by CEREDOC The French asylum court is involved in the brain-storming on COI with other bodies such as the EU and the IARLJ

32. CEREDOC The head of the centre is a judge One “chargé de mission” (adviser) Two assistants (one legal assistant and one geopolitical assistant) Six COI researchers Five legal researchers Two administrative staff Collect, select and distribute current, relevant and reliable update COI

33. Main products of the CEREDOC Weekly press reports Monthly COI newsletters Country reports Surveys, topical notes, reports of conferences and lectures Quality check and cross-reading

34. Our own documents on COI Documentation packages on 70 countries of origin (library of links directing to websites) available on our website http://www.cnda.fr/ ORIGIN files (documents which provides information on COI and case law, currently for 14 countries of origin and next year 13 countries more) Surveys Topical Notes

35. Fact-finding missions 2005 : Bosnia, Bangladesh 2006: Azerbaijan/Armenia 2010: Kosovo, Bangladesh 2012: Georgia, Côte d’Ivoire 2013: Albania, DRC/Congo/Angola 2014: Mauritania 2015: Kosovo, Bangladesh 2016: Nigeria 2017 : Haïti and Guinéa Missions carried out in cooperation with the French Office for the protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA) Those reports of missions are sometimes referred to in ECtHR judgements (e.g.ECtHR SR v France n°31283/11 7/10/2014)

36. Query answers and single cases requests Check particular statement in the case-file Written answers Specifically referenced

37. COI provided by the parties Our decisions also refer to COI sources provided by the parties, when relevant for the particular case. They can influence the evidence assessment Sometimes OFPRA refers to COI in its decisions or in its submissions to the Court For instance, in a case concerning the issue of the existence of a particular social group composed of widows facing problems obtaining custody of their children in Kosovo, OFPRA submitted a report by the Ombudsman of Kosovo and the Court denied the existence of such a group (CNDA, GF, 2014-01-31, Ms A.H.T., n° 12013217) The Asylum Law (2015-07-29) protects the information, in the file of the applicant, the disclosure of which could harm people’s safety (people who gave those information) and provides that these documents cannot be disclosed (article L. 723-10)

38. Judicial practice (1) Some important judgements made reference to COI sources: for example, in a judgement issued on February 2007, concerning the widow of former president Habyarimana of Rwanda, the CRR (refugees Board of Appeal) referred to several COI sources when reaching the conclusion that the applicant ought to be excluded from protection (CRR, 2007-02-15, Ms Kanziga Habyarimana, n° 564776) The fact that ECtHR regularly pointed to the poorly developped reasoning of some French asylum judgements, in particular in relation to the use of COI, prompted the CNDA to address the issue Since 2009, COI has been more frequently referenced in judgements of the CNDA Asylum Judges use relevant, renowned and up-dated COI sources, which are gathered by the COI Unit of the Court (CEREDOC) which is often required for help regarding particular research.

39. Judicial practice (2) Moreover, the Court can use public COI sources which are not in French (generally in English) provided that it won’t prevent the control of the Conseil d’Etat (CE, 2014-12-30, M. Kisikyol, n°371502) When adjudicating cases, asylum judges are free to access sources as they see fit. Whatever sources they use, whether found by themselves or provided by the parties, particular attention is paid to: - reliability of COI sources (in judgements, judges refer to renowned documents and authors (objectivity, neutrality, exhaustiveness…) - Consequently, judges apply a hierarchy of sources: reports from international organizations; governmental reports; reputable NGOs - Publicity of COI sources: COI references in judgments are generally taken from publicly available documents. When this in not the case, they must be provided to the parties - Timeliness of COI sources: judgements must refer to up-to-date COI sources as the asylum judge appraises the situation at the moment of his/her decision

40. Recent examples The French National Court of Asylum intended to define the general level of risk to which is exposed the population of Tamil origin in Sri Lanka in the current context of M. Siresena’s presidency (December 2016). After recalling that the sources relied upon are freely available to the public, the Court enumerates them following a specific order: UN reports – Reports from governmental agencies – Reports from NGO’s. CNDA GF 8 December 2016 Mme K. n° 14027836 C+

41. Recent examples In a recent case, the Grand Chamber of the French National Court of Asylum undertook to assess the general situation of Nigerian women victims of trafficking. The Court chose here to rely on two reports: the 2015 EASO COI report “Nigeria Sex trafficking of women” and the December 2016 report of an OFPRA-CNDA joint fact-finding mission in Nigeria (French determining authority and the National Court of Asylum). The judgment also cites a June 2016 report from the US Department of State “2016 Trafficking in Persons Report - Nigeria CNDA GF 30 March 2017 Mme F. n° 16015058 R

42. French Databases Legal database « Ariane web » www.conseil-etat.fr « collection of jurisprudence » www.cnda.fr

43. Thank you for your attention CEREDOC Research and Documentation Centre French National Asylum Court (CNDA) Isabelle DELY, Presidente de Section, Head of the CEREDOC