Austria: New legislation on immigration (feature)
01 November 1997
The revision of the law on residence, immigration, asylum and access to employment for foreign nationals has turned into a farce on account of its underlying requirements, i.e. to turn away refugees and to strictly limit immigration.
The objective of the 1997 Asylum Law is to carry out asylum procedures at the border itself, and as quickly as possible. The intention is to avoid "abuse of asylum" or to establish that Austria is not responsible for accepting the asylum-seeker. These were also the underlying intentions of the asylum law which has been in force since June 1992 and which has led to a sharp fall in the number of applications for asylum to about 5,000 per year, whereas in previous years there had been a continuous increase with a peak of 27,000 applications in 1991. The impact of the restrictions which have been introduced can also be seen in the fact that this policy of deterrence did not result in higher rates of recognition. Originally the political justification for this policy was "to remain a country that would continue to accept those who were genuinely persecuted". The number of those who had been granted asylum dropped to less than one thousand per year (on average 9 per cent). Before the new law was introduced in 1991 2,500 (13 per cent) had been granted asylum according to the Geneva Convention.
Now border controls are to become so tight that Austria will be able to take an active role in the "sealing off" system of Schengen. The asylum procedure is conceived as one of suspended repatriation and expulsion.
Refugees who apply for asylum at the border will have to wait while a preliminary procedure is carried out prior to being granted entry. Without referring to the asylum authorities, the immigration authorities will reject the asylum applications of and refuse entry to those refugees whose application has already resulted in a negative decision. There is no actual provision for a right of appeal.
If refugees have not previously applied unsuccessfully and if they explicitly ask for an application form and questionnaire at the border, then the immigration authorities are supposed to hand them out. Those asylum seekers who have been turned away will have to wait for the decision of the Federal Asylum Office, either abroad or in no man's land, on whether they are likely to be granted asylum and hence whether they will be allowed entry. In this procedure no written documentation is used except the application form. There is no provision for legal assistance or the help of an interpreter. Hence the refugees are entirely at the mercy of immigration officials. But only a few asylum seekers are expected to be subject to this immigration procedure which falls short of European minimum guarantees. Hardly any requests for asylum have been lodged at the border in recent years, but most refugees have entered the country illegally instead.
Refugees who have entered the country via the airport or have arrived directly from their countries of origin are not affected by this application form procedure. They are interviewed by the Federal Asylum Office about their personal reasons for leaving their country of origin and about their route, but their expulsion procedure is suspended for the first week after arrival during which time they are not allowed to leave a designated area. Asylum seekers who have been granted a residence permit or who have been given a preliminary residence permit by the Federal Asylum Office are exempt from this kind of detention. The UNHCR has the right to appeal if refugees are turned away under procedures at airports. The 1997 Asylum Law fully implements international agreements that are aimed at speedily carrying out unlawful asylum procedures (according to a recommendation of the EU- Ministers competent in immigration matters) as well as to pass on responsibility for the examination of asylum requests and the admission of refugees to other countries (Dublin Conventi