4.2.2 Acceptance rate for Dublin requests

Foreword
Acknowledgements
Acronyms and abbreviations
Introduction
Section 1. Global overview of asylum in 2020
- Global patterns in international protection needs 2020
- 1.1 General overview
- 1.2 Resettlement at the global level in 2020
- 1.3 Digital connectivity and digitalisation
Section 2. Major developments in asylum in the European Union in 2020
- 2.1 Road to a Common European Asylum System
  - 2.1.1 First and second phases of CEAS and the 2016 reform proposals
  - 2.1.2 The European Commission’s new Pact on Migration and Asylum
- 2.2 Responding to the new reality of the COVID-19 pandemic
- 2.3 Key developments in policy and practices at the EU level
- 2.4 External dimension of EU policy
- 2.5 Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the EU
Section 3. EASO support to countries
Section 4. Functioning of the Common European Asylum System
Section 4.1 Access to procedure
- 4.1.1 Arriving to the European Union: Access to territory
- 4.1.2 Data on applications for international protection
- 4.1.3 Socio-economic indicators to analyse the situation of asylum
- 4.1.4 Arranging the first steps of the asylum procedure
Section 4.2 The Dublin procedure
- 4.2.1 Decisions on outgoing Dublin requests
- 4.2.2 Acceptance rate for Dublin requests
- 4.2.3 Decisions on take charge and take back requests
- 4.2.4 National efforts to amend the overall process
- 4.2.5 Guidance and research on the application of the Dublin III Regulation
- 4.2.6 Concerns around the clauses related to family reunification
- 4.2.7 Use of the discretionary clause
- 4.2.8 Assessing transfers to specific countries: The cases of Bulgaria, Greece and Italy
- 4.2.9 Implementation of transfers to another Member State
- 4.2.10 Following an implemented transfer
Section 4.3 Special procedures to assess protection needs
- 4.3.1 Border procedures
- 4.3.2 Safe country of origin and safe third country concept
- 4.3.3 Accelerated procedures
- 4.3.4 Admissibility procedures
- 4.3.5 Repeated applications
Section 4.4 Processing asylum applications at first instance
- 4.4.1 Setting up more efficient systems
- 4.4.2 Decisions issued on first instance asylum applications
- 4.4.3 Managing case loads
- 4.4.4 Withdrawn applications
- 4.4.5 Assessing applications
- 4.4.6 Managing time limits and notifications
- 4.4.7 Organising personal interviews
- 4.4.8 Training staff
- 4.4.9 Monitoring and quality assurance
- 4.4.10 Accessing case files
Section 4.5 Processing asylum applications at second or higher instances
- 4.5.1 Reorganising second instance bodies
- 4.5.2 Data on second and higher instances
- 4.5.3 Suspension of a return during an appeal
- 4.5.4 Adapting oral and written procedures
- 4.5.5 Managing time limits and the backlog on appeals
- 4.5.6 Digitalising processes
- 4.5.7 Revising the notification of decisions
Section 4.6 Pending cases
Section 4.7 Reception of applicants for international protection
- 4.7.1 Organisation and functioning of reception systems
- 4.7.2 Applicants’ daily life
Section 4.8 Detention during the asylum procedure
- 4.8.1 Recourse to detention
- 4.8.2 Temporary practical arrangements
- 4.8.3 Types of detention facilities and capacity
- 4.8.4 Conditions in detention facilities
- 4.8.5 Detention of minors and applicants with special needs
- 4.8.6 Alternatives to detaining applicants
- 4.8.7 Training detention staff
- 4.8.8 Overseeing the framework for detention
Section 4.9 Access to information
- 4.9.1 Providing information on the asylum procedure
- 4.9.2 Informing applicants about their rights and obligations in the context of everyday life
- 4.9.3 Providing information about the return of rejected applicants
Section 4.10 Legal assistance and representation
- 4.10.1 Organising legal assistance and representation
- 4.10.2 Accessing legal aid
- 4.10.3 Providing legal assistance to appeal a decision
- 4.10.4 Ensuring the quality of legal aid
Section 4.11 Interpretation services
- 4.11.1 Providing interpretation
- 4.11.2 Organisations responsible for interpreters
- 4.11.3 Improving quality
- 4.11.4 Making new information available
- 4.11.5 New working methods
Section 4.12 Country of origin information
Section 4.13 Statelessness in the asylum context
- 4.13.1 Understanding statelessness and statelessness-related trends
- 4.13.2 Changing legislation and policies
- 4.13.3 Areas for improvement
Section 4.14 Content of protection
- 4.14.1 Granting international protection: Recognition rates
- 4.14.2 Building perspectives: Legal status and family reunification
- 4.14.3 Developing policies: Integration plans and their evaluations
- 4.14.4 Support for integration: Orientation, education, employment, health and welfare
Section 4.15 Return of former applicants
- 4.15.1 Regulating returns at the European level
- 4.15.2 Coordinated EU approach and increasing role of Frontex
- 4.15.3 Authorities responsible for the return procedure
- 4.15.4 Refining national legislation on the issuance of a return decision to third-country nationals
- 4.15.5 Efficiency of the return process
- 4.15.6 Programmes supporting return and reintegration assistance
- 4.15.7 Providing information on return
- 4.15.8 Return of minors
- 4.15.9 Implementing a return
Section 4.16 Resettlement and humanitarian admissions
- 4.16.1 Impediments to reaching national resettlement quotas in 2020
- 4.16.2 Citizenship of resettled refugees
- 4.16.3 National developments in resettlement programmes
- 4.16.4 Community Sponsorship Programmes
Section 5. Children and applicants with special needs
- 5.1 Children going through the asylum procedure
- 5.2 Identifying and attending to special needs
- 5.3 Protecting women and girls
- 5.4 Victims of human trafficking
- 5.5 LGBTI applicants in the asylum procedure
- 5.6 Reception of applicants with special needs
Concluding remarks: The way forward
Bibliography
Reader’s guide
Statistical tables
Infographics

The acceptance rate for decisions on Dublin requests measures the proportion of decisions accepting responsibility for an application (explicitly or implicitly) out of all decisions issued. The acceptance rate in 2020 was 56%, showing a continued decrease for the third successive year at the EU+ level and also in most Dublin Member States.

However, the EU+ rate masks large variations which can be found at the country level. While just 3% of the decisions issued by Greece (see the right side of Figure 4.6) and 4% of decisions by Hungary accepted responsibility, the acceptance rate was close to 90% or higher in Latvia, Lithuania and Portugal. The acceptance rates also differed across nationalities, which was at least partially influenced by the country issuing the decision.

Overall, nationals from Afghanistan received the most decisions on outgoing Dublin requests (13%), followed at some distance by Syrians, Iraqis, Algerians, Nigerians, Pakistanis and Moroccans (in descending order, see Figure 4.7).^xxiWhile the number of decisions decreased for most nationalities compared to 2019, there were some noteworthy exceptions. In particular, Moroccans and Syrians were represented slightly more often. The increase for Moroccans was mainly linked to more decisions issued by Croatia on Slovenian requests (largely refusals) and to a lesser extent more decisions by Romania on Austrian requests (mainly acceptances). The increase for Syrians was triggered by more responses from Romania to requests from Austria and Germany (primarily acceptances), as well as more responses from Greece to requests from Germany and vice versa (mostly rejections in both cases).

The number of decisions involving Afghans and Algerians remained relatively stable. However, for many other citizenships there were significant decreases, most notably for Nigerians (-65%) and Turks (-50%).