The Policy and Politics of Refugees: A conversation with Pascal Brice (Part 2)

Pascal Brice is the Executive Director of France’s Office of Protection for Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA). He was invited to the University of Chicago by the Pearson Institute for the Study and Resolution of Global Conflicts and sat down with Prabhat Singh to discuss the refugee crisis in Europe from a French perspective. This is part two of their conversation, which focuses on applications for political asylum and improving France’s commitment to supporting refugees. You can find the first part of the interview here, and listen to the full conversation at the University of Chicago Public Policy Podcasts (UC3P).

I want to discuss what asylum laws are and how they are applied. If I understand correctly, a person who enters France is supposed to apply for asylum within 90 days of entry. Then, OFPRA looks at the application to decide whether or not it should be accepted. What are some of the criteria based on which this decision is made?

Our bible is the Geneva Convention, which states the criteria to be a refugee. These criteria are: persecution mainly on the basis of political views, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation and every other trait that makes a person part of a social group.

OFPRA receives applications which explain reasons behind why the applicant cannot go back to his or her country. Then, every applicant is interviewed to determine the credibility of these claims. OFPRA has specialist researchers to check the state of hostilities in different nations. In case the criteria listed in the Geneva Convention don’t apply, we check whether the applicant can be brought under the protection of European Law with subsidiary protection. The subsidiary protection is also a form of asylum which can be provided under two conditions: first, people who don’t qualify for protection under the Geneva Convention but are fleeing war zones—for example, parts of Afghanistan and Syria. Two, if there’s a fear of torture or death penalty.

However, if the applicant qualifies neither under the Geneva Convention nor under subsidiary protection, then the appeal is rejected, and the person has to leave the country, though there is scope to appeal the decision in a court of law.

I would like to talk about the time taken to decide on a political asylum application, which, as per available statistics, is usually between six to twelve months. Recently, OFPRA has claimed that this will be brought down to two months. What are some of the steps you are taking to achieve this?

This is a very important goal for us. When I entered my current role as head of OFPRA six years ago, the average delay in deciding application was nine months. This is the time taken at OFPRA, which isn’t the only agency involved in the process of asylum.

First, an applicant has to register himself or herself in the respective prefecture. Then, the file has to be sent to OFPRA for consideration of asylum. If it’s rejected, the applicant has the option to approach the courts. About three years ago, the overall time taken in this process was two years, which has now dropped to one year. The time taken at OFPRA has now reduced from about eight months to three months. We’ve been reorganizing and reforming OFPRA continuously for the past six years. We are now putting in place a new process to reduce the time taken for interviews, which will further bring down the overall time taken.

But I must say something here. The first right of asylum seekers is to get a fair decision, and their second right is to get a quick decision because they’ve suffered so much that making them wait too long is not an option. However, having said that, we follow another very important principle while ruling on applications, which is that the length of the process must be adapted to the personal situation of the asylum seeker. For example, when we’re talking about women who have been persecuted simply for being women or those who’ve been persecuted for their sexuality, these people might need time to convey their real fears. A young woman who has fled Nigeria because she was being trafficked and sexually exploited needs to be given enough time to make her case to us. Hence, we adapt the length of the procedure.

Despite OFPRA’s attempts to protect refugees and your commitment to the principle of non-refoulement, I feel there’s substantial room for improvement in terms of what France can do to help refugees. What is France doing to better meet its commitment to refugees?

We have to do much more and much better, not only in France but around the world. OFPRA is doing a lot to reform itself. First, we need to make it easier for people to apply for asylum when they need to. This is a European and a French issue. Second, we have to make sure that all asylum seekers are accommodated, which hasn’t happened yet, though we are working towards this. Third, we have to integrate refugees better. In my mind, the question is, how can we achieve all this while keeping in mind the social context in France, Europe, the U.S. and many other countries, a point which I raised at the very beginning.

Read the first part of the interview here, and listen to the full conversation at the University of Chicago Public Policy Podcasts (UC3P).

Featured photo: cc/(Fotograf aus Leidenschaft, photo ID: 1125263802, from iStock by Getty Images)