The identification of victims of torture in the national asylum procedure The questions in this section sought to elicit whether asylum-seekers are identified as victims of torture (VoTs) in the national asylum legislation, and whether the national legislation sets out who is in charge of their identification. Member centres were also asked whether there is a specific procedure in place for the early identification of VoTs, and, if so, at what stage of the asylum procedure early identification takes place. Finally, member centres were asked whether the authorities in charge of the identification of VoTs receive any training. Key findings on the identification of victims of torture in the national asylum procedure • The asylum interview is the most common method for identifying VoTs (83 percent of participants referred to it as a method). Only 50 percent of countries indicate that medical screening is provided in national legislation as a method for identifying VoTs. • Seventy-seven percent of the participating countries indicate that there is no national legislation to determine who is in charge of identifying VoTs within the national asylum procedure. • The Pacific region has the most developed system for identifying vulnerable persons within the asylum procedure. However, the means for identifying VoTs is implemented through policy or practice, not through legislation. • Most of the EU Member States indicate that there are no special procedures for the early identification of vulnerable persons, including VoTs, in the national asylum procedure. With the new provisions to the Reception Conditions Directive, Member States will be obliged to assess vulnerable persons to ensure that they identify those with special reception needs (see Part 3). QUESTION 1 According to national legislation, how are vulnerable asylum-seekers identified as VoTs by the national immigration authorities? Member centres were asked to indicate whether VoTs were identified (a) by providing background information on the asylum application; (b) by interview(s); (c) by written questionnaire; (d) by medical screening(s); or (e) by another method. Member centres were asked to indicate all methods used. “ Swedish Red Cross, Malmö “Worst practice occurs when an asylum-seeker in the asylum interview has told immigration authorities that he/she has been tortured and is told by the Migration Board that it is the asylum-seeker’s own responsibility to find assistance to submit the necessary evidence.” Recognising victims of torture in national asylum procedures / 23