Brussels, 22/02/2013 (Agence Europe) - According to the Advocate General Cruz Villalón of the Court of Justice of the EU, when an unaccompanied minor presents asylum applications in more than one member state, the state responsible for examining them will be the one in which the most recent application was submitted. In this regard, no members of the minor's family should be legally present in another member state and the minor's interests should not require another solution.
The “Dublin II” regulation lays down criteria making it possible to establish the member state competent for examining an asylum application made in the EU, in such a way that in theory, the competence is granted to a single member state. When a third-country national applies for asylum in a member state other than the one established by the regulation as competent, the regulation provides for a procedure to transfer the asylum seeker to the competent member state.
Two minors of Eritrean nationality (MA and BT) and a minor of Iraqi nationality and Kurdish origin (DA) applied for asylum in the United Kingdom. The British authorities noted that they had already presented asylum applications in other member states, namely Italy (MA and BT) and the Netherlands (DA). As these member states were held to be responsible for examining their asylum applications, it was decided to transfer the minors to these states.
If the asylum seeker is an unaccompanied minor, the regulation provides that the member state responsible for examining the application is the one in which a member of his or her family is legally present, as long as this is in the minor's interests. In the absence of a family member, the member state responsible for examining the application is the one in which the minor made his or her asylum application. However, in this latter scenario, the regulation does not expressly provide for a solution in the situation in which the minor has applied for asylum in more than one member state. The interpretation of this issue has been tackled for the first time in the conclusions presented by Advocate General Cruz Villalón, who takes the view that when an unaccompanied minor, with no family members legally resident in any member state, applies for asylum in more than one member state, the member state responsible for examining the asylum application should, in theory, and taking account of the minor's interests and unless these interests call for another solution, be the state in which the most recent application was filed. (LC/transl.fl)