3.5.6. Examination of appeals lodged by specific profiles of applicants

Several EU+ countries suspended appeal cases due to developments in various regions or third countries and updated their practice guidelines for specific profiles of applicants. For example:

• Due to the volatile situation in the Gaza Strip, the Danish Refugee Appeals Board decided in October 2023 to suspend deportations of stateless Palestinians to Gaza.476  
   
• In April 2023, the Danish Refugee Appeals Board suspended the examination of asylum applications from Sudanese nationals.
   
• In May 2023, the UNE in Norway suspended the examination of appeals lodged by Sudanese nationals due to the outbreak of war in Sudan. The examination of appeals and the suspension of the obligation to leave for Sudan were lifted in November 2023.
   
• From 24 February 2022 to 12 October 2023, the examination of asylum applications from Ukrainian nationals was suspended by the Refugee Appeals Board and cases were sent back to the Danish Immigration Service for a new first instance decision.477  

In addition, in Norway, the UNE updated its practice note on the assessment of persecution based on sexual orientation.478  

The Dutch Minister for Migration decided to impose a decision and departure moratorium for several countries (see Section 3.4.5) and the examination of appeals lodged by applicants from those countries was discontinued, as the IND revoked the decisions.

Under the UNHCR Legal and Protection Policy Research Series, the University of Copenhagen carried out a study on how religion-based asylum claims related to sur place conversion were adjudicated across the appeal levels in Denmark, Norway and Sweden. The study concluded that there were differences in the legal reasoning and among individual decision-makers within the same asylum system. The differences related to inclusion of COI, references to international law, regional and national jurisprudence and guidance, credibility indicators and weight accorded to different types of evidence. 

The study emphasised that these types of cases were prone to bias and inconsistency that risk impacting fair and objective decision-making. The report provided recommendations for assessing religious conversion claims, such as conducting risk assessments with an emphasis on up-to-date COI, methods to ensure effective disclosure in conversion cases, quality interpretation and dialogue with religious institutions.479