case, with a view to determining an applicant’s eligibility for international refugee protection. 46. If the host country has received diplomatic assurances from the country of origin or habitual residence, this does not as such provide grounds for considering a claim as manifestly unfounded. The asylum application should be examined in the regular asylum procedure, unless it is manifestly unfounded for other reasons. Depending on the circumstances, it may be appropriate, however, to prioritize the treatment of such claims. 67 Where the circumstances of the case give rise to considerations of exclusion under Article 1F of the 1951 Convention, and particularly in the case of persons who may have been involved in terrorist acts, asylum applications may be considered on a priority basis by specialized exclusion units within the institution responsible for refugee status determination. 68 47. Determinations on asylum applications should be made by a single, central specialized asylum authority, on the basis of a full factual and legal assessment of the individual case, taking into account all available information on the situation in the country of origin or, in the case of a stateless person, the country of former habitual residence. 69 This applies in all situations, including where the authorities of that country have submitted a request for the extradition of an asylum-seeker. 48. In assessing the weight which may be given to diplomatic assurances in the examination of an asylum claim, the decision-making authority should be guided by the criteria which have been developed under international and regional human rights law for the evaluation of diplomatic assurances. 70 In the refugee context, this means determining whether such assurances can be considered a suitable and reliable tool to eliminate the risk of persecution facing the applicant in the country concerned and may, therefore, justify a finding that he or she does not qualify for international protection as a refugee. In doing so, decision-makers would need to bear in mind the particular nature of an asylum claim. 49. It should be recalled, in particular, that an asylum-seeker has established a claim for refugee status if he or she has a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion (the 67 On the criteria which must be met for a claim to be considered “manifestly unfounded”, see Executive Committee, Conclusion No. 30 (XXXIV) – 1983 on the Problem of Manifestly Unfounded or Abusive Applications for Refugee Status or Asylum, at paragraph (d); see also UNHCR, Asylum Processes (Fair and Efficient Asylum Procedures), above footnote 60, at paragraphs 25–32. 68 See UNHCR, Background Note on Exclusion, above footnote 55, at paragraph 101. It should be noted that applications involving questions related to exclusion under Article 1F of the 1951 Convention should not be treated as “manifestly unfounded”, as they may give rise to complex issues of substance and credibility which are not given appropriate consideration in accelerated procedures. See UNHCR, Asylum Processes (Fair and Efficient Asylum Procedures), above footnote 60, at paragraph 29. 69 See Executive Committee, Conclusion No. 8 (XXVIII) – 1977 on Determination of Refugee Status, at paragraph (e)(iii); see also UNHCR, Asylum Processes (Fair and Efficient Asylum Procedures), above footnote 60, at paragraph 50 (i) and (j). 70 See above at paragraphs 20–26. 18