asylumlaw.org: Dublin II

D R A F T: For internal aslyumlaw.org use only

Valid for Europe only.

The Dublin II regulation is determining which of the countries in the "Dublin area" is responsible for examining an asylum application. If you want to be sure that a certain country of asylum is responsible for your application you must know more about Dublin II. The "Dublin area" or "Dublin II area" includes Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, United Kingdom, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden. Denmark does not participate to the Dublin II system. Norway and Iceland do participate though they are not EU Member States. So the Dublin area is slightly different from the EU area.

You should always respect the official Dublin procedure. Many people travel without authorisation to another Dublin State in order to join their family there. But they risk losing everything: The other state will not examine the asylum application as the first one is in charge. And the first one might finish the examination in absence of the applicant. The result is almost always negative: no asylum in the two states, no further chance to get asylum in the whole Dublin area as the ”one-chance-only” principle applies. So, once you have applied for asylum within the Dublin area, you have to accept the outcome of Dublin II. Don’t travel to another Dublin State without authorisation!

Is it possible to avoid the application of Dublin II by saying: ”I do not apply for asylum but I apply for humanitarian protection”? Humanitarian protection is protection against forcible return / expulsion for other reasons than the once mentioned in the Geneva Refugee Convention. The answer to this question is not easy. We deal with it on Alternatives to Dublin II? Humanitarian protection. But before you check alternatives, please verify the result of Dublin II in your individual case.

Our first general explanations are:

If no other indication is given, the situation at the time of the first application within the Dublin area is the relevant one. So it does not matter whether the situation was different before or after.

When we write that one state can ask another to examine the application and to take over the applicant, this does not mean that it must do so. It can also examine the asylum application itself. Some Dublin States prefer to do so because they think it takes too much time to convince the other state to take the applicant and his application back. A report of the year 2000 on the old Dublin I reveals the states' practice at that time (please click here). The same report states elsewhere that requests to take over an applicant are rejected in 10 to 50%. So, you cannot always know where you end up.

Unfortunately, Dublin II is a complicated system that cannot be easily simplified. You should read the original text in order to find out which Dublin State is responsible for examining your asylum claim.

If you follow the reading instructions, it will be much easier to find out which Dublin State is responsible for you. The reading instructions reflect the logical structure of the Dublin regulation. The logical structure is slightly different from the text structure.

The first and most important reading instruction is:
Don’t read the full text. Read the following list of criteria first. Check from the top down which articles are relevant for you. Only when you think that the article might be relevant for you, click on the link for the article. Come back to the list when you have followed the other reading instructions. Check then the next criteria of the list.

We also have added explanations (green), examples (blue), and reading instructions (red) to make the rules easier to understand.

You are an unaccompanied minor and you have a member of your family somewhere in the Dublin II area:
read Articles 6, 14 and Article 15-3 (the third paragraph of Article 15).

A member of your family has been recognised somewhere in the Dublin II area:
read Article 7, 14 and 15.

A member of your family is still in the asylum procedure somewhere in the Dublin area:
read Article 8, 14 and 15..

You have more than one valid residence document or visa issued by different Dublin States:
Read Article 9-3 and 9-5

You have one valid residence document:
read Article 9-1 and 9-5

You have one valid visa:
read Article 9-2 and 9-5

You have an expired residence document or visa:
read Article 9-4 and 9-5

You know by which border you entered the Dublin area and you entered the Dublin area less than one year ago:
read Article 10-1.

You lived in the Dublin area for five months before you applied for asylum:
read Article 10-2.

You entered the Dublin area by a state for which you did not need a visa:
read Article 11.

You applied for asylum in an international transit area:
read Article 12.

In all other cases read Article 13.

CHAPTER I SUBJECT-MATTER AND DEFINITIONS Article 1 This Regulation lays down the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for asylum lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national.
Article 2 For the purposes of this Regulation: (a) "third-country national" means anyone who is not a citizen of the Union within the meaning of Article 17(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community; (b) "Geneva Convention" means the Convention of 28 July 1951 relating to the status of refugees, as amended by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967; (c) "application for asylum" means the application made by a third-country national which can be understood as a request for international protection from a Member State, under the Geneva Convention. Any application for international protection is presumed to be an application for asylum, unless a third-country national explicitly requests another kind of protection that can be applied for separately; (d) "applicant" or "asylum seeker" means a third country national who has made an application for asylum in respect of which a final decision has not yet been taken; (e) "examination of an asylum application" means any examination of, or decision or ruling concerning, an application for asylum by the competent authorities in accordance with national law except for procedures for determining the Member State responsible in accordance with this Regulation; (f) "withdrawal of the asylum application" means the actions by which the applicant for asylum terminates the procedures initiated by the submission of his application for asylum, in accordance with national law, either explicitly or tacitly; (g) "refugee" means any third-country national qualifying for the status defined by the Geneva Convention and authorised to reside as such on the territory of a Member State; (h) "unaccompanied minor" means unmarried persons below the age of eighteen who arrive in the territory of the Member States unaccompanied by an adult responsible for them whether by law or by custom, and for as long as they are not effectively taken into the care of such a person; it includes minors who are left unaccompanied after they have entered the territory of the Member States; (i) "family members" means insofar as the family already existed in the country of origin, the following members of the applicant's family who are present in the territory of the Member States: (i) the spouse of the asylum seeker or his or her unmarried partner in a stable relationship, where the legislation or practice of the Member State concerned treats unmarried couples in a way comparable to married couples under its law relating to aliens; (ii) the minor children of couples referred to in point (i) or of the applicant, on condition that they are unmarried and dependent and regardless of whether they were born in or out of wedlock or adopted as defined under the national law; (iii) the father, mother or guardian when the applicant or refugee is a minor and unmarried; (j) "residence document" means any authorisation issued by the authorities of a Member State authorising a third-country national to stay in its territory, including the documents substantiating the authorisation to remain in the territory under temporary protection arrangements or until the circumstances preventing a removal order from being carried out no longer apply, with the exception of visas and residence authorisations issued during the period required to determine the responsible Member State as established in this Regulation or during examination of an application for asylum or an application for a residence permit; (k) "visa" means the authorisation or decision of a Member State required for transit or entry for an intended stay in that Member State or in several Member States. The nature of the visa shall be determined in accordance with the following definitions: (i) "long-stay visa" means the authorisation or decision of a Member State required for entry for an intended stay in that Member State of more than three months; (ii) "short-stay visa" means the authorisation or decision of a Member State required for entry for an intended stay in that State or in several Member States for a period whose total duration does not exceed three months; (iii) "transit visa" means the authorisation or decision of a Member State for entry for transit through the territory of that Member State or several Member States, except for transit at an airport; (iv) "airport transit visa" means the authorisation or decision allowing a third-country national specifically subject to this requirement to pass through the transit zone of an airport, without gaining access to the national territory of the Member State concerned, during a stopover or a transfer between two sections of an international flight.
CHAPTER II GENERAL PRINCIPLES Article 3 1. Member States shall examine the application of any third-country national who applies at the border or in their territory to any one of them for asylum. The application shall be examined by a single Member State, which shall be the one which the criteria set out in Chapter III indicate is responsible. 2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, each Member State may examine an application for asylum lodged with it by a third-country national, even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation. In such an event, that Member State shall become the Member State responsible within the meaning of this Regulation and shall assume the obligations associated with that responsibility. Where appropriate, it shall inform the Member State previously responsible, the Member State conducting a procedure for determining the Member State responsible or the Member State which has been requested to take charge of or take back the applicant. 3. Any Member State shall retain the right, pursuant to its national laws, to send an asylum seeker to a third country, in compliance with the provisions of the Geneva Convention. 4. The asylum seeker shall be informed in writing in a language that he or she may reasonably be expected to understand regarding the application of this Regulation, its time limits and its effects.
Article 4 1. The process of determining the Member State responsible under this Regulation shall start as soon as an application for asylum is first lodged with a Member State. 2. An application for asylum shall be deemed to have been lodged once a form submitted by the applicant for asylum or a report prepared by the authorities has reached the competent authorities of the Member State concerned. Where an application is not made in writing, the time elapsing between the statement of intention and the preparation of a report should be as short as possible. 3. For the purposes of this Regulation, the situation of a minor who is accompanying the asylum seeker and meets the definition of a family member set out in Article 2, point (i), shall be indissociable from that of his parent or guardian and shall be a matter for the Member State responsible for examining the application for asylum of that parent or guardian, even if the minor is not individually an asylum seeker. The same treatment shall be applied to children born after the asylum seeker arrives in the territory of the Member States, without the need to initiate a new procedure for taking charge of them. 4. Where an application for asylum is lodged with the competent authorities of a Member State by an applicant who is in the territory of another Member State, the determination of the Member State responsible shall be made by the Member State in whose territory the applicant is present. The latter Member State shall be informed without delay by the Member State which received the application and shall then, for the purposes of this Regulation, be regarded as the Member State with which the application for asylum was lodged. The applicant shall be informed in writing of this transfer and of the date on which it took place. 5. An asylum seeker who is present in another Member State and there lodges an application for asylum after withdrawing his application during the process of determining the Member State responsible shall be taken back, under the conditions laid down in Article 20, by the Member State with which that application for asylum was lodged, with a view to completing the process of determining the Member State responsible for examining the application for asylum. This obligation shall cease, if the asylum seeker has in the meantime left the territories of the Member States for a period of at least three months or has obtained a residence document from a Member State.
CHAPTER III HIERARCHY OF CRITERIA Article 5 1. The criteria for determining the Member State responsible shall be applied in the order in which they are set out in this Chapter. 2. The Member State responsible in accordance with the criteria shall be determined on the basis of the situation obtaining when the asylum seeker first lodged his application with a Member State.
Article 6 Where the applicant for asylum is an unaccompanied minor, the Member State responsible for examining the application shall be that where a member of his or her family is legally present, provided that this is in the best interest of the minor. In the absence of a family member, the Member State responsible for examining the application shall be that where the minor has lodged his or her application for asylum.	"Legally present" means with a valid residence permit or long-stay visa. Asylum seekers are not yet ”legally present." An "unaccompanied minor" is somebody between 0 and 17 years old who is not married and not accompanied by an adult who is responsible for him. Only fathers, mothers, and guardians are "family members" of "unaccompanied minors" in the context of Article 6. According to Article 15-3, also other members of the minor's family, even without residence permit, can be taken into account. Example: Mike applied for asylum in Spain because of the civil war in southern Sudan. He had lost his father some years before in the civil war. In Sudan he was living with his mother and her new husband. His mother lives still in Sudan, but her new husband lives in Denmark where he was recognised as refugee. Spain will probably ask Denmark to take over Mike and to examine his asylum application. Always read Article 14 and Article 15-3 together with this article
Article 7 Where the asylum seeker has a family member, regardless of whether the family was previously formed in the country of origin, who has been allowed to reside as a refugee in a Member State, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for asylum, provided that the persons concerned so desire.	Only spouses and natural or adopted children of at least one of the two partners of a married couple are "family members" in the context of Article 7. Second or third wives are not recognised as spouses. Example: Hassan from Somalia applied recently for asylum in Luxembourg. He marries a lady from Somalia living in Germany. He came to know her recently. His wife has no refugee status, but is ”tolerated” for humanitarian reasons because she risks to be circumcised against her will. Has Germany to take over Hassan and his asylum application? It does not harm that they never lived together, but the answer is nonetheless ”No”: As Hassan’s wife has a humanitarian status, but no refugee status, Article 7 does not apply. Germany is allowed to take over Hassan according to Article 15, but it is not obliged to do so according to Article 7. Always read Article 14 and Article 15 together with this article!
Article 8 If the asylum seeker has a family member in a Member State whose application has not yet been the subject of a first decision regarding the substance, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for asylum, provided that the persons concerned so desire.	Only spouses and natural or adopted children of at least one of the two partners of a married couple are "family members". Second or third wives are not recognised as spouses. Always read Article 14 and Article 15 together with this article!
Article 9 1. Where the asylum seeker is in possession of a valid residence document, the Member State which issued the document shall be responsible for examining the application for asylum.	A residence document is valid for more than three months. Example: Ananda from Sri Lanka has a British residence permit and a French visa. He entered the territory of the European Union via Frankfurt airport in Germany where he applied for asylum. Because of the British residence permit, the United Kingdom has to examine the asylum application. All other criteria (visa and point of entry into the Dublin area) are not relevant. Always read Article 9-5 together with this article!
2. Where the asylum seeker is in possession of a valid visa, the Member State which issued the visa shall be responsible for examining the application for asylum, unless the visa was issued when acting for or on the written authorisation of another Member State. In such a case, the latter Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for asylum. Where a Member State first consults the central authority of another Member State, in particular for security reasons, the latter's reply to the consultation shall not constitute written authorisation within the meaning of this provision.	Example: Cesaria, a journalist from Angola, had criticised the corruption of the Angolan government. She has got a French visa in order to participate to a journalists’ conference in Paris. On her way to Paris, she applies for asylum in Portugal (Lisbon airport) where she has some cousins. Portugal can ask France to examine her asylum claim because of the French visa, though she never entered France! Always read Article 9-5 together with this article!
3. Where the asylum seeker is in possession of more than one valid residence document or visa issued by different Member States, the responsibility for examining the application for asylum shall be assumed by the Member States in the following order: (a) the Member State which issued the residence document conferring the right to the longest period of residency or, where the periods of validity are identical, the Member State which issued the residence document having the latest expiry date; (b) the Member State which issued the visa having the latest expiry date where the various visas are of the same type; (c) where visas are of different kinds, the Member State which issued the visa having the longest period of validity, or, where the periods of validity are identical, the Member State which issued the visa having the latest expiry date.	For instance a transit visa valid for some days and a tourist visa valid for three months are "visas of different kinds". Dublin II distinguishes between the following ”kinds” of visa: - ”long-stay visa” for people who will get a residence permit allowing them to live there for more than 3 months; - ”short-stay visa” for a stay up to 3 months (in all Member States together); - ”transit visa” and ”airport transit visa.” Example: Chandra from India was a local activist against the caste system. Some leading members of an extremist Hindu party persecute him. He had known that he wouldn’t get a visa for Germany if he says that he wants to apply for asylum. Therefore he had successfully asked for a long-stay visa and a residence permit as specialised cook in the Indian restaurant of his cousin. Thus he got a residence permit for Germany valid for one year. He also has a residence permit for the Netherlands valid for 3 years because his wife lives there. He applies for asylum in Germany. Will the Netherlands or Germany examine Chandra’s application? If Germany comes to know of the other residence permit, it will ask the Netherlands to examine the asylum application because the residence permit in the Netherlands is valid for a longer period than the German one. Always read Article 9-5 together with this article!
4. Where the asylum seeker is in possession only of one or more residence documents which have expired less than two years previously or one or more visas which have expired less than six months previously and which enabled him actually to enter the territory of a Member State, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall apply for such time as the applicant has not left the territories of the Member States. Where the asylum seeker is in possession of one or more residence documents which have expired more than two years previously or one or more visas which have expired more than six months previously and enabled him actually to enter the territory of a Member State and where he has not left the territories of the Member States, the Member State in which the application is lodged shall be responsible.	Example 1: Abdullah was legally living in Belgium until one year ago. After returning to his country Afghanistan he faced problems with a local warlord. The Italian police arrest him on the second illegal journey to Belgium. Thus he applies for asylum in Italy. Belgium is not in charge of examining his application but Italy, because he has left the territory of the European Union. Example 2: Mustafa was as well legally living in Belgium. Then he decided to join his brother in the United Kingdom without UK visa or residence permit. He is caught 18 months later by the British police. Belgium is still in charge of his asylum claim because he has not left the territory of the European Union. Example: When his first application for asylum was rejected three years ago, Chris from Uganda had no residence permit for Finland anymore. Since then he has been living in Sweden illegally. One day he decides to apply again for asylum, but this time under another name. His fingerprints and his former application reveal his real identity. Nonetheless Sweden is in charge of his application because the residence permit expired more than two years ago. Always read Article 9-5 together with this article!
5. The fact that the residence document or visa was issued on the basis of a false or assumed identity or on submission of forged, counterfeit or invalid documents shall not prevent responsibility being allocated to the Member State which issued it. However, the Member State issuing the residence document or visa shall not be responsible if it can establish that a fraud was committed after the document or visa had been issued.	Please note that Article 9 does not apply when the visa too is counterfeit or forged. Example: Martha from Chechnya (Russia) is in possession of the passport of a friend. In the passport there is a visa of the Czech Republic. She entered the European Union illegally via Slovakia and the Czech Republic, but applied for asylum in Poland. The passport is valid, the Czech visa as well, but the photograph was exchanged after delivery of the visa in Moscow. The Czech Republic is in charge of the asylum application, because it delivered a visa. But if the Czech Republic can prove that the photo was exchanged after the visa had been inserted, Slovakia is in charge because Martha entered the European Union via Slovakia (see Article 10). If your case does not fall under this Article, please check our list of Dublin criteria again, from top down.
Article 10 1. Where it is established, on the basis of proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists mentioned in Article 18(3), including the data referred to in Chapter III of Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000, that an asylum seeker has irregularly crossed the border into a Member State by land, sea or air having come from a third country, the Member State thus entered shall be responsible for examining the application for asylum. This responsibility shall cease 12 months after the date on which the irregular border crossing took place.	Article 10-1 refers to two different lists of types of evidence used to prove particular matters. The lists of proof are here. Example: Salima from Syria risks to be killed by her husband and his family because of alleged adultery. On her flight the German police catches 20 kilometres beyond the Austrian boarder. She applies spontaneously for asylum. The police discover in her pocket a one-month-old ferry ticket for the journey Alexandria - Athens. Germany can ask Greece to examine the asylum application and to take back Salima because such tickets are a ”weak” means of proof according to the mentioned second list. But Germany might also examine the application itself instead of trying to convince the Greek authorities that the ferry ticket is evidence enough for a transit through Greece. This is the most frequent case in which the practice differs from the legal situation. If your case does not fall under this Article, please check our list of Dublin criteria again, from top down.
2. When a Member State cannot or can no longer be held responsible in accordance with paragraph 1, and where it is established, on the basis of proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists mentioned in Article 18(3), that the asylum seeker - who has entered the territories of the Member States irregularly or whose circumstances of entry cannot be established - at the time of lodging the application has been previously living for a continuous period of at least five months in a Member State, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for asylum. If the applicant has been living for periods of time of at least five months in several Member States, the Member State where this has been most recently the case shall be responsible for examining the application.	Example: Nguyen, a Christian from Vietnam, had been living first in Hungary for 7 months and then in Slovakia for six months. He applied for asylum in Austria. Hungary is in charge of the application because he stayed there for a longer period than in Slovakia. If your case does not fall under this Article, please check our list of Dublin criteria again, from top down.
Article 11 1. If a third-country national enters into the territory of a Member State in which the need for him or her to have a visa is waived, that Member State shall be responsible for examining his or her application for asylum. 2. The principle set out in paragraph 1 does not apply, if the third-country national lodges his or her application for asylum in another Member State, in which the need for him or her to have a visa for entry into the territory is also waived. In this case, the latter Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for asylum.	Example: Han from Hong Kong does not need a visa for the United Kingdom (Britain). But he applies for asylum in France where his brother in law runs a business. The United Kingdom has to examine the application because he would have needed a visa for entering France legally. It will not ask France to take over Han and his asylum claim. If your case does not fall under this Article, please check our list of Dublin criteria again, from top down.
Article 12 Where the application for asylum is made in an international transit area of an airport of a Member State by a third-country national, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application.	Example: Maria from Cuba has booked a flight to Russia via Madrid and Paris. She has to change the plane first in Madrid and then in Paris. She applies for asylum at Paris Charles de Gaulle airport at the boarder controls for people who want to leave the international transit area and enter France. France has to examine the application. It cannot say that it is not responsible though Maria could have asked for asylum at the Madrid airport as well. In the context of Dublin II Maria has not ”entered Spain” or ”entered the European Union” just because she changed her plane in Madrid! Attention: There have been cases in which, according to help organisation for refugees, the right to apply for asylum in transit areas has not been respected. We do not know whether these reports are right. But if ever it happens to you, try to contact such an organisation. In order to be prepared, search for help organisation for refugees preferably in advance! (insert link to the page ”Start” at the Number 8.) If your case does not fall under this Article, please check our list of Dublin criteria again, from top down.
Article 13 Where no Member State responsible for examining the application for asylum can be designated on the basis of the criteria listed in this Regulation, the first Member State with which the application for asylum was lodged shall be responsible for examining it.	Example 1: Mohammed from Ghana was trafficked by ship to an unknown seaport in northern Europe and then by lorry to Norway. He applies for asylum in Norway. After one month he travels to Ireland by ship and applies again for asylum at the Dublin seaport. Ireland might ask Norway to take Mohammed back and to examine his case. Norway is legally in charge of Mohammed because he first applied for asylum there. As it cannot be stated where Mohammed first entered the Dublin area, no other Dublin state might be in charge of him. We assume that Article 13 does not apply if the asylum seeker has left the Dublin area between the first and the second application. See Example 2. Example 2: Sharif, a liberal student from Iran, had applied for asylum in Germany two years ago. His application was rejected. He returned to Iran, but faced again political problems with religious conservatives. He decided to flee again, but this time to Italy. Italy discovers that Sharif had applied for asylum two years ago in Germany. Can Italy ask Germany to take over Sharif and to examine his case? For a couple of legal arguments we think that Italy cannot do so. But we are not sure that all Dublin States have the same view. If your case does not fall under this Article, please check our list of Dublin criteria again, from top down.
Article 14 Where several members of a family submit applications for asylum in the same Member State simultaneously, or on dates close enough for the procedures for determining the Member State responsible to be conducted together, and where the application of the criteria set out in this Regulation would lead to them being separated, the Member State responsible shall be determined on the basis of the following provisions: (a) responsibility for examining the applications for asylum of all the members of the family shall lie with the Member State which the criteria indicate is responsible for taking charge of the largest number of family members; (b) failing this, responsibility shall lie with the Member State which the criteria indicate is responsible for examining the application of the oldest of them.	Always read Article 15 together with this article!
CHAPTER IV HUMANITARIAN CLAUSE Article 15 1. Any Member State, even where it is not responsible under the criteria set out in this Regulation, may bring together family members, as well as other dependent relatives, on humanitarian grounds based in particular on family or cultural considerations. In this case that Member State shall, at the request of another Member State, examine the application for asylum of the person concerned. The persons concerned must consent. 2. In cases in which the person concerned is dependent on the assistance of the other on account of pregnancy or a new-born child, serious illness, severe handicap or old age, Member States shall normally keep or bring together the asylum seeker with another relative present in the territory of one of the Member States, provided that family ties existed in the country of origin. 3. If the asylum seeker is an unaccompanied minor who has a relative or relatives in another Member State who can take care of him or her, Member States shall if possible unite the minor with his or her relative or relatives, unless this is not in the best interests of the minor. 4. Where the Member State thus approached accedes to the request, responsibility for examining the application shall be transferred to it. 5. The conditions and procedures for implementing this Article including, where appropriate, conciliation mechanisms for settling differences between Member States concerning the need to unite the persons in question, or the place where this should be done, shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 27(2).	The legal character of Article 15 is different from all other articles. All other articles ”oblige” Dublin States to accept the responsibility for an asylum application and to take over the applicant. Not in all, but in most of the cases, the Dublin States respect this obligation. Article 15 gives them only the possibility / the option to take over the responsibility for an asylum applicant and his application. It is up to the Dublin States whether they follow the advice of Article 15 or not. You can verify this by your own: The wording in Article 15 is different as it only says that Member States (Dublin States) ”may” or ”shall” do this or that. The consequences of this different legal character are important: You should never rely on Article 15, but always check which Dublin State is responsible if Article 15 is not applied. If your case does not fall under this Article, please check our list of Dublin criteria again, from top down.
CHAPTER V TAKING CHARGE AND TAKING BACK Article 16 1. The Member State responsible for examining an application for asylum under this Regulation shall be obliged to: (a) take charge, under the conditions laid down in Articles 17 to 19, of an asylum seeker who has lodged an application in a different Member State; (b) complete the examination of the application for asylum; (c) take back, under the conditions laid down in Article 20, an applicant whose application is under examination and who is in the territory of another Member State without permission; (d) take back, under the conditions laid down in Article 20, an applicant who has withdrawn the application under examination and made an application in another Member State; (e) take back, under the conditions laid down in Article 20, a third-country national whose application it has rejected and who is in the territory of another Member State without permission. 2. Where a Member State issues a residence document to the applicant, the obligations specified in paragraph 1 shall be transferred to that Member State. 3. The obligations specified in paragraph 1 shall cease where the third-country national has left the territory of the Member States for at least three months, unless the third-country national is in possession of a valid residence document issued by the Member State responsible. 4. The obligations specified in paragraph 1(d) and (e) shall likewise cease once the Member State responsible for examining the application has adopted and actually implemented, following the withdrawal or rejection of the application, the provisions that are necessary before the third-country national can go to his country of origin or to another country to which he may lawfully travel.
Article 17 1. Where a Member State with which an application for asylum has been lodged considers that another Member State is responsible for examining the application, it may, as quickly as possible and in any case within three months of the date on which the application was lodged within the meaning of Article 4(2), call upon the other Member State to take charge of the applicant. Where the request to take charge of an applicant is not made within the period of three months, responsibility for examining the application for asylum shall lie with the Member State in which the application was lodged. 2. The requesting Member State may ask for an urgent reply in cases where the application for asylum was lodged after leave to enter or remain was refused, after an arrest for an unlawful stay or after the service or execution of a removal order and/or where the asylum seeker is held in detention. The request shall state the reasons warranting an urgent reply and the period within which a reply is expected. This period shall be at least one week. 3. In both cases, the request that charge be taken by another Member State shall be made using a standard form and including proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists mentioned in Article 18(3) and/or relevant elements from the asylum seeker's statement, enabling the authorities of the requested Member State to check whether it is responsible on the basis of the criteria laid down in this Regulation. The rules on the preparation of and the procedures for transmitting requests shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 27(2).
Article 18 1. The requested Member State shall make the necessary checks, and shall give a decision on the request to take charge of an applicant within two months of the date on which the request was received. 2. In the procedure for determining the Member State responsible for examining the application for asylum established in this Regulation, elements of proof and circumstantial evidence shall be used. 3. In accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 27(2) two lists shall be established and periodically reviewed, indicating the elements of proof and circumstantial evidence in accordance with the following criteria: (a) Proof: (i) This refers to formal proof which determines responsibility pursuant to this Regulation, as long as it is not refuted by proof to the contrary. (ii) The Member States shall provide the Committee provided for in Article 27 with models of the different types of administrative documents, in accordance with the typology established in the list of formal proofs. (b) Circumstantial evidence: (i) This refers to indicative elements which while being refutable may be sufficient, in certain cases, according to the evidentiary value attributed to them. (ii) Their evidentiary value, in relation to the responsibility for examining the application for asylum shall be assessed on a case-by-case basis. 4. The requirement of proof should not exceed what is necessary for the proper application of this Regulation. 5. If there is no formal proof, the requested Member State shall acknowledge its responsibility if the circumstantial evidence is coherent, verifiable and sufficiently detailed to establish responsibility. 6. Where the requesting Member State has pleaded urgency, in accordance with the provisions of Article 17(2), the requested Member State shall make every effort to conform to the time limit requested. In exceptional cases, where it can be demonstrated that the examination of a request for taking charge of an applicant is particularly complex, the requested Member State may give the reply after the time limit requested, but in any case within one month. In such situations the requested Member State must communicate its decision to postpone a reply to the requesting Member State within the time limit originally requested. 7. Failure to act within the two-month period mentioned in paragraph 1 and the one-month period mentioned in paragraph 6 shall be tantamount to accepting the request, and entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the provisions for proper arrangements for arrival.
Article 19 1. Where the requested Member State accepts that it should take charge of an applicant, the Member State in which the application for asylum was lodged shall notify the applicant of the decision not to examine the application, and of the obligation to transfer the applicant to the responsible Member State. 2. The decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall set out the grounds on which it is based. It shall contain details of the time limit for carrying out the transfer and shall, if necessary, contain information on the place and date at which the applicant should appear, if he is travelling to the Member State responsible by his own means. This decision may be subject to an appeal or a review. Appeal or review concerning this decision shall not suspend the implementation of the transfer unless the courts or competent bodies so decide on a case by case basis if national legislation allows for this. 3. The transfer of the applicant from the Member State in which the application for asylum was lodged to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the first Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within six months of acceptance of the request that charge be taken or of the decision on an appeal or review where there is a suspensive effect. If necessary, the asylum seeker shall be supplied by the requesting Member State with a laissez passer of the design adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 27(2). The Member State responsible shall inform the requesting Member State, as appropriate, of the safe arrival of the asylum seeker or of the fact that he did not appear within the set time limit. 4. Where the transfer does not take place within the six months' time limit, responsibility shall lie with the Member State in which the application for asylum was lodged. This time limit may be extended up to a maximum of one year if the transfer could not be carried out due to imprisonment of the asylum seeker or up to a maximum of eighteen months if the asylum seeker absconds. 5. Supplementary rules on carrying out transfers may be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 27(2).
Article 20 1. An asylum seeker shall be taken back in accordance with Article 4(5) and Article 16(1)(c), (d) and (e) as follows: (a) the request for the applicant to be taken back must contain information enabling the requested Member State to check that it is responsible; (b) the Member State called upon to take back the applicant shall be obliged to make the necessary checks and reply to the request addressed to it as quickly as possible and under no circumstances exceeding a period of one month from the referral. When the request is based on data obtained from the Eurodac system, this time limit is reduced to two weeks; (c) where the requested Member State does not communicate its decision within the one month period or the two weeks period mentioned in subparagraph (b), it shall be considered to have agreed to take back the asylum seeker; (d) a Member State which agrees to take back an asylum seeker shall be obliged to readmit that person to its territory. The transfer shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within six months of acceptance of the request that charge be taken by another Member State or of the decision on an appeal or review where there is a suspensive effect; (e) the requesting Member State shall notify the asylum seeker of the decision concerning his being taken back by the Member State responsible. The decision shall set out the grounds on which it is based. It shall contain details of the time limit on carrying out the transfer and shall, if necessary, contain information on the place and date at which the applicant should appear, if he is travelling to the Member State responsible by his own means. This decision may be subject to an appeal or a review. Appeal or review concerning this decision shall not suspend the implementation of the transfer except when the courts or competent bodies so decide in a case-by-case basis if the national legislation allows for this. If necessary, the asylum seeker shall be supplied by the requesting Member State with a laissez passer of the design adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 27(2). The Member State responsible shall inform the requesting Member State, as appropriate, of the safe arrival of the asylum seeker or of the fact that he did not appear within the set time limit. 2. Where the transfer does not take place within the six months' time limit, responsibility shall lie with the Member State in which the application for asylum was lodged. This time limit may be extended up to a maximum of one year if the transfer or the examination of the application could not be carried out due to imprisonment of the asylum seeker or up to a maximum of eighteen months if the asylum seeker absconds. 3. The rules of proof and evidence and their interpretation, and on the preparation of and the procedures for transmitting requests, shall be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 27(2). 4. Supplementary rules on carrying out transfers may be adopted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 27(2).
CHAPTER VI ADMINISTRATIVE COOPERATION Article 21 1. Each Member State shall communicate to any Member State that so requests such personal data concerning the asylum seeker as is appropriate, relevant and non-excessive for: (a) the determination of the Member State responsible for examining the application for asylum; (b) examining the application for asylum; (c) implementing any obligation arising under this Regulation. 2. The information referred to in paragraph 1 may only cover: (a) personal details of the applicant, and, where appropriate, the members of his family (full name and where appropriate, former name; nicknames or pseudonyms; nationality, present and former; date and place of birth); (b) identity and travel papers (references, validity, date of issue, issuing authority, place of issue, etc.); (c) other information necessary for establishing the identity of the applicant, including fingerprints processed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000; (d) places of residence and routes travelled; (e) residence documents or visas issued by a Member State; (f) the place where the application was lodged; (g) the date any previous application for asylum was lodged, the date the present application was lodged, the stage reached in the proceedings and the decision taken, if any. 3. Furthermore, provided it is necessary for the examination of the application for asylum, the Member State responsible may request another Member State to let it know on what grounds the asylum seeker bases his application and, where applicable, the grounds for any decisions taken concerning the applicant. The Member State may refuse to respond to the request submitted to it, if the communication of such information is likely to harm the essential interests of the Member State or the protection of the liberties and fundamental rights of the person concerned or of others. In any event, communication of the information requested shall be subject to the written approval of the applicant for asylum. 4. Any request for information shall set out the grounds on which it is based and, where its purpose is to check whether there is a criterion that is likely to entail the responsibility of the requested Member State, shall state on what evidence, including relevant information from reliable sources on the ways and means asylum seekers enter the territories of the Member States, or on what specific and verifiable part of the applicant's statements it is based. It is understood that such relevant information from reliable sources is not in itself sufficient to determine the responsibility and the competence of a Member State under this Regulation, but it may contribute to the evaluation of other indications relating to the individual asylum seeker. 5. The requested Member State shall be obliged to reply within six weeks. 6. The exchange of information shall be effected at the request of a Member State and may only take place between authorities whose designation by each Member State has been communicated to the Commission, which shall inform the other Member States thereof. 7. The information exchanged may only be used for the purposes set out in paragraph 1. In each Member State such information may, depending on its type and the powers of the recipient authority, only be communicated to the authorities and courts and tribunals entrusted with: (a) the determination of the Member State responsible for examining the application for asylum; (b) examining the application for asylum; (c) implementing any obligation arising under this Regulation. 8. The Member State which forwards the information shall ensure that it is accurate and up-to-date. If it transpires that that Member State has forwarded information which is inaccurate or which should not have been forwarded, the recipient Member States shall be informed thereof immediately. They shall be obliged to correct such information or to have it erased. 9. The asylum seeker shall have the right to be informed, on request, of any data that is processed concerning him. If he finds that this information has been processed in breach of this Regulation or of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data(8), in particular because it is incomplete or inaccurate, he is entitled to have it corrected, erased or blocked. The authority correcting, erasing or blocking the data shall inform, as appropriate, the Member State transmitting or receiving the information. 10. In each Member State concerned, a record shall be kept, in the individual file for the person concerned and/or in a register, of the transmission and receipt of information exchanged. 11. The data exchanged shall be kept for a period not exceeding that which is necessary for the purposes for which it is exchanged. 12. Where the data is not processed automatically or is not contained, or intended to be entered, in a file, each Member State should take appropriate measures to ensure compliance with this Article through effective checks.
Article 22 1. Member States shall notify the Commission of the authorities responsible for fulfilling the obligations arising under this Regulation and shall ensure that those authorities have the necessary resources for carrying out their tasks and in particular for replying within the prescribed time limits to requests for information, requests to take charge of and requests to take back asylum seekers. 2. Rules relating to the establishment of secure electronic transmission channels between the authorities mentioned in paragraph 1 for transmitting requests and ensuring that senders automatically receive an electronic proof of delivery shall be established in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 27(2).
Article 23 1. Member States may, on a bilateral basis, establish administrative arrangements between themselves concerning the practical details of the implementation of this Regulation, in order to facilitate its application and increase its effectiveness. Such arrangements may relate to: (a) exchanges of liaison officers; (b) simplification of the procedures and shortening of the time limits relating to transmission and the examination of requests to take charge of or take back asylum seekers; 2. The arrangements referred to in paragraph 1 shall be communicated to the Commission. The Commission shall verify that the arrangements referred to in paragraph 1(b) do not infringe this Regulation.
CHAPTER VII TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS AND FINAL PROVISIONS Article 24 1. This Regulation shall replace the Convention determining the State responsible for examining applications for asylum lodged in one of the Member States of the European Communities, signed in Dublin on 15 June 1990 (Dublin Convention). 2. However, to ensure continuity of the arrangements for determining the Member State responsible for an application for asylum, where an application has been lodged after the date mentioned in the second paragraph of Article 29, the events that are likely to entail the responsibility of a Member State under this Regulation shall be taken into consideration, even if they precede that date, with the exception of the events mentioned in Article 10(2). 3. Where, in Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000 reference is made to the Dublin Convention, such reference shall be taken to be a reference made to this Regulation.
Article 25 1. Any period of time prescribed in this Regulation shall be calculated as follows: (a) where a period expressed in days, weeks or months is to be calculated from the moment at which an event occurs or an action takes place, the day during which that event occurs or that action takes place shall not be counted as falling within the period in question; (b) a period expressed in weeks or months shall end with the expiry of whichever day in the last week or month is the same day of the week or falls on the same date as the day during which the event or action from which the period is to be calculated occurred or took place. If, in a period expressed in months, the day on which it should expire does not occur in the last month, the period shall end with the expiry of the last day of that month; (c) time limits shall include Saturdays, Sundays and official holidays in any of the Member States concerned. 2. Requests and replies shall be sent using any method that provides proof of receipt.
Article 26 As far as the French Republic is concerned, this Regulation shall apply only to its European territory.
Article 27 1. The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. 2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Articles 5 and 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply. The period laid down in Article 5(6) of Decision 1999/468/EC shall be set at three months. 3. The Committee shall draw up its rules of procedure.
Article 28 At the latest three years after the date mentioned in the first paragraph of Article 29, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Regulation and, where appropriate, shall propose the necessary amendments. Member States shall forward to the Commission all information appropriate for the preparation of that report, at the latest six months before that time limit expires. Having submitted that report, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Regulation at the same time as it submits reports on the implementation of the Eurodac system provided for by Article 24(5) of Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000.
Article 29 This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. It shall apply to asylum applications lodged as from the first day of the sixth month following its entry into force and, from that date, it will apply to any request to take charge of or take back asylum seekers, irrespective of the date on which the application was made. The Member State responsible for the examination of an asylum application submitted before that date shall be determined in accordance with the criteria set out in the Dublin Convention.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the Member States in conformity with the Treaty establishing the European Community. Done at Brussels, 18 February 2003.