IRCT REGIONAL REPORT 2016 Special procedural guarantees Article 24 of the Asylum Procedures Directive provides for special procedural guarantees for persons identified as torture victims so that they can benefit from the rights contained in the directive. Torture victims often suffer from PTSD and exhibit symptoms such as involuntary disassociation, avoidance and memory loss and intense emotions of distrust, fear and isolation. PTSD and torture trauma can severely inhibit a person’s ability to engage with asylum procedures in a way that avoids re-traumatisation and ensures an appropriate assessment of their protection claim. IRCT member centres noted that in their experience, asylum authorities do not provide the full scope of special support torture victims need. Once victims are identified, some Member States take a level of measures to avoid re-traumatisation in the asylum process, for instance, in relation to the interview procedure. Unfortunately, the implementation of these measures suffers greatly in the current context where asylum authorities are overwhelmed and have been forced to employ many new and inexperienced case officers, who are assigned to interview vulnerable applicants. Furthermore, in the experience of some IRCT members, requests for the postponement of interviews are rarely considered, even when requests are accompanied by medical diagnoses. Many asylum authorities also do not allow torture victims to bring family members, social workers or psychologists to support them during the status determination interviews. These deficiencies in identification and support measures, not only risk the re-traumatisation of torture victims, they also enhances the risk that the refugee status determination will not adequately take into account the psychological symptoms suffered by many victims and take relevant corrective measures to ensure that the process itself is suitable to provide an appropriate examination of the asylum claim. Accelerated procedures Article 24(3) of the Asylum Procedures Directive features provisions for accelerated asylum procedures for asylum seekers. One of the main grounds for activating this procedure is if the asylum seeker comes from a country that is said to be ‘safe’. Under the accelerated procedures, the legal guarantees and safeguards for the asylum seeker are more restricted and the duration of the procedure is shortened. Some accelerated procedures are decided in one week with an appeals procedure that can subsequently take three more weeks. For torture victims, these processes can lead to return to a country where they are at risk of more torture and ill-treatment as, among other problems, they might not have access to MLRs to medically substantiate their allegations of torture in a shortened asylum procedure. Treating symptoms related to the conditions of PTSD as a consequence of torture is often a long-term process that is incompatible with the time-frame of an accelerated procedure. These procedures are also often associated with deprivation of liberty, which can either re-traumatise or further aggravate torture traumatisation. Many of the IRCT members expressed serious concern about the feasibility of identifying torture victims in such a short time frame, especially as the existence of torture and ill-treatment is fairly well publicised in many countries of origin considered “safe”. For instance, amongst the countries considered safe by Member States surveyed in this report are Algeria, India,32 Morocco33 and Tunisia.34 All of these countries are regularly criticised by relevant UN monitoring mechanisms for the continued use of torture and their lack of adequate support to victims. Reception conditions Article 17(2) of the Reception Conditions Directive stipulates that material reception conditions shall ensure an “adequate standard of living” for asylum seekers, which protects their mental health. Furthermore, Article 18(3) notes that “Member States shall take into consideration gender and age-specific concerns and the situation of vulnerable persons in relation to applicants within the premises and accommodation centres.” In practice, however, IRCT member centres participating in this report noted that in their countries or regions, there is rarely any consideration given to the mental health or the particular situation of the torture victim. Indeed, conditions of overcrowded facilities with a lack of privacy are ubiquitous across the Member States surveyed in this report. page 41