IRCT REGIONAL REPORT 2016
In the experience of Zebra, a key problem is the lack of a
procedure or mechanism to ensure the systematic identification of torture victims in Austria. During the initial
screening interview, typically conducted by the police,
questions about torture are generally not raised. During
the second, substantive interview conducted by the Federal
Agency for Immigration and Asylum in Austria, the caseworker may or may not choose to ask questions about
torture. Even if the asylum seeker states that he or she
has been tortured, the person is not automatically referred
to specialised support measures concerning asylum
procedures, housing or healthcare.
This means that the first point of contact for many asylum
seekers is now the police station, where they can claim
asylum and have their initial interview. However, the police
do not have the required knowledge or training to work
with vulnerable asylum seekers, which means that they are
less likely to identify signs of torture and ill-treatment and
refer potential victims for further examination and care. In
Zebra’s experience, authorities working with torture victims
do not receive appropriate training. In the past Zebra
provided authorities with special training on how to engage
with torture victims but due to shifting priorities as a result
of the recent influx, this is no longer the case.
Vulnerable asylum seekers are not provided with a medical
examination, despite explicit state obligations to do so in
the Asylum Procedures Directive. Part of the problem is the
Amended Aliens Law of July 2015. In the past, large reception facilities would serve as a first point of contact for all
asylum seekers where the authorities could triage individual
applicants. The initial interview and a medical examination
would take place here. However, the amended law has limited
the number of these large reception facilities and introduced
more reception centres of smaller sizes and capacity.
In September 2015, the
European Commission
brought forth infringement
proceedings against Austria
for failing to properly
transpose the Reception
Conditions Directive.
Asylum application
in Austria, 2010 - 2015
Asylum applications in Austria,
2010 – 2015
90,000
85,505
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
28,035
20,000
10,000
14,420
17,415
17,500
11,045
0
2010
2011
2012
2013
page 12
2014
2015