Publication details
Pozdě uvedené skutečnosti: s vinou, či bez viny? Zavinění při uplatnění nových skutečností v řízeních ve věci mezinárodní ochrany
| Title in English | Late disclosure of facts: with or without fault? Fault in the application of new facts in proceedings concerning international protection. |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Year of publication | 2026 |
| Type | Chapter in a book |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Description | This paper analyzes the current issue of the scope of judicial review in international protection matters in the context of the amendment to the Asylum Act (No. 314/2025 Coll.) and the EU Asylum Procedure Regulation. Specifically, it focuses on a critical assessment of the newly established Section 33a(2) of the Asylum Act. This provision follows case law that conditions the admissibility of new facts in court proceedings on the absence of fault on the part of the claimant. Based on an analysis of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the EU (particularly the Ahmedbekova judgment), the author concludes that the question of fault is essentially irrelevant given the absolute nature of the principle of non-refoulement. Courts are obliged to perform an ex nunc assessment of the real risk of serious harm, regardless of the stage at which the information was provided or the reasons for its late submission. Consequently, the new legislation does not bring procedural simplification, as a substantive assessment of the risk must logically precede the examination of procedural fault. |