Geneva – The ongoing freeze by the United Kingdom and European Union countries on 10s of thousands of Syrian asylum applications is deeply concerning. The freeze, carried out without individual assessments, constitutes a violation of international law—particularly the principle of non-refoulement—given the current absence of safe and dignified conditions for return to Syria.
According to official sources in countries including Germany, France, Austria, and Greece, several EU countries have initiated a comprehensive review of asylum applications submitted by Syrians, effectively freezing 10s of thousands of cases pending further clarification of the political situation in Syria.
In Germany, the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) announced the suspension of all decisions regarding asylum applications submitted by Syrians. According to a statement from a spokesperson for the office, this move has affected more than 47,000 applications, including 46,081 initial claims.
I am now stuck in limbo, as the Belgian authorities have suspended my asylum application, including my right to family reunification
Noura, a Syrian activist who lived in Lebanon throughout the Syrian war
Meanwhile, French authorities have begun temporarily suspending asylum applications from Syrians and are conducting a comprehensive review of past decisions. According to the French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA), around 700 applications—including those from minors—are currently under review. Approximately 45,000 Syrians have previously been granted refugee status through standard procedures.
Austria's interim government announced in December 2024 the suspension of all asylum processing for Syrians, following the armed opposition's takeover of Damascus and the collapse of the Bashar al-Assad regime. The Austrian Interior Minister also ordered a review of previously approved asylum cases and halted family reunification procedures. Authorities indicated they are considering resettlement and organised repatriation programmes. Notably, Syrians constitute the largest group of asylum seekers in Austria, with 12,871 applications registered as of November 2024.
As stated by a senior government official in Greece, authorities have decided to suspend the processing of approximately 9,000 asylum applications submitted by Syrians following the political changes in Syria since the collapse of the Assad regime.
The UK Home Office announced on 9 December 2024 that it had "temporarily paused" decisions regarding asylum applications submitted by Syrian nationals following the fall of Assad. The Home Office stated that the measure aims to assess the current situation in Syria, emphasising that all guidance related to asylum remains "under constant review". More than 6,600 Syrian asylum applications in the UK were on pause as of February 2025. Angela Eagle, Minister of State for Border Security and Asylum, said the pause would remain in place until reliable information becomes available to support accurate decision-making.
Syria remains unsafe for return, according to UNHCR, which confirms that current conditions there do not meet the criteria for safe, voluntary, and dignified repatriation, despite recent political developments.
Any changes to asylum processing must comply with the 1951 Refugee Convention, the cornerstone of international refugee law. The Convention obliges states not to withdraw or terminate international protection except in exceptional, clearly defined circumstances, and only following an individual and fair assessment of each case.
International protection should not be automatically revoked simply because there is a change in the political system of the country of origin. Such a decision requires objectively stable conditions that clearly ensure the safety and security of returnees. These conditions include the presence of functioning institutions capable of offering returnees effective protection, the absence of individual or collective threats, and the resolution of the fundamental issues that initially led to seeking asylum.
The collective freeze of asylum applications without individual case assessments constitutes a clear violation of international law, particularly the principle of non-refoulement enshrined in Article 33 of the 1951 Refugee Convention. This principle is a bedrock of international protection, strictly prohibiting the return of any person—directly or indirectly—to a country where they face a risk of persecution, torture, or inhuman or degrading treatment.
The right to a fair and individual asylum procedure is clearly established in European law, particularly in Directive 2013/32/EU, which requires Member States to assess each asylum application individually and fairly, based on the applicant's specific circumstances. Articles 44 and 45 of the Directive require that any withdrawal of international protection be based on new, reliable evidence and assessed on a case-by-case basis. The applicant must be informed in writing of the reasons for withdrawal and their rights and be given a fair opportunity to present their case—either through a personal interview or written statement—through procedures grounded in accurate, up-to-date information.
Disregarding these legal obligations, whether under international or European law, by resorting to the collective or automatic suspension of asylum applications, threatens refugee safety and reveal the biased foundations of the international protection system. Such practices risk arbitrary decision-making, erode the right to asylum, and weaken trust in international justice and the legal mechanisms meant to protect individuals.
Such a policy represents a serious violation of asylum seekers' rights, effectively depriving them of fundamental protections under international human rights law, including access to education, employment, adequate housing, family reunification, legal protection, and healthcare. Keeping thousands of people in prolonged, unjustified waiting worsens their psychological and social distress, increasing their vulnerability to poverty, isolation, economic and social abuse, and exploitation in the informal labour market.
If prolonged, the current situation may lead to indirect refoulement. Syrian asylum seekers may feel compelled to return under the weight of mounting psychological pressure, deteriorating living conditions, and a lack of legal clarity caused by prolonged delays and procedural uncertainty. Even without a formal deportation order, this form of silent pressure, caused by collective freeze policies, clearly violates the fundamental principle of international law prohibiting refoulement. States bear full legal responsibility for any action or condition that effectively undermines international protection and compels a refugee to return to a country that remains unsafe.
In a statement to Euro-Med Monitor, Noura, a Syrian activist who lived in Lebanon throughout the Syrian war to escape the Assad regime's brutality, said: "I travelled from Lebanon to Belgium last year to attend the annual Brussels Conference on Syria, but while departing from Rafic Hariri International Airport in Beirut, the Lebanese General Security issued a decision banning me from re-entering Lebanon."
She continued, "When I arrived in Brussels, I applied for asylum, but the authorities suspended my application—just as they did with thousands of other Syrian applicants following the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime."
Explained Noura, "My husband was forced to return to Syria, where he now lives in constant danger. I wanted to return after the fall of the regime, but as an Alawite, I was overcome by fear following the events on the coast in March 2025. My husband, who is still there, advised me not to return and confirmed those fears.
"I am now stuck in limbo," she added, "as the Belgian authorities have suspended my asylum application, including my right to family reunification. I cannot return to Lebanon or Syria, nor even reunite with my husband."
Euro-Med Monitor stresses that freezing asylum applications exposes individuals to legal and economic instability and restricts their rights to education, work, and a dignified life. Delaying the processing of international protection claims violates their right to protection and the ability to build a safe, stable life in a new country when returning to their homeland is not safe.
A young Syrian man, Omar, told Euro-Med Monitor: "Last year, I travelled from Lebanon, where I had lived since the start of the war, to Belgium. However, I was shocked to learn that the Lebanese General Security had issued a decision preventing me from re-entering Lebanon. I applied for protection in Belgium, but the authorities have suspended my application following the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime."
Omar added, "Now I can't return to Lebanon, or Syria, because I fear persecution by certain groups involved in overthrowing the former regime due to my public criticism of their actions over the past years."
The continued suspension of Syrian asylum applications without legal or humanitarian justification violates the international obligations of European countries and the United Kingdom under refugee and human rights law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. European states and the UK must immediately end the collective freeze on Syrian asylum applications, as it represents a serious violation of international justice and infringes upon rights guaranteed under international and European law. Each application must be assessed individually, based on the applicant's specific circumstances, and in line with international protection standards established by the 1951 Refugee Convention and the EU Asylum Procedures Directives.
Governments must not use political changes in Syria as a pretext to revoke refugee status unless it is proven, under the strict criteria of the 1951 Refugee Convention, that a fundamental and durable change has occurred. This includes the establishment of a safe environment in Syria where human rights are respected, accountability mechanisms exist, guarantees of non-repetition are ensured, and victims have access to redress.
All asylum seekers must have free access to qualified lawyers and certified interpreters until a final decision is made on their applications, ensuring their right to defence and fair procedures in accordance with EU directives and international law. Full and temporary legal and social protection must be guaranteed to all asylum seekers while their applications are pending, including access to education, work, housing, healthcare, and temporary legal residency. This is essential to prevent legal limbo and protect individuals from exploitation or indirect refoulement.
European states should double their resettlement quotas under humanitarian protection mechanisms for the most vulnerable groups, particularly widows, persons with disabilities, and victims of torture, and ensure legal guardians are appointed for unaccompanied minors while expediting their family reunification procedures.
All states must enhance transparency and accountability in decisions to withdraw or freeze asylum applications by clearly and publicly outlining the criteria used to assess the situation in Syria. They should provide regular updates to all relevant parties, including human rights organisations and local communities. These criteria must rely on objective, up-to-date reports from independent sources, such as UNHCR, to ensure decisions are based on accurate and verified information.
