The Concept of a Safe Country of Origin: Are Territorial and Personal Exceptions Permissible?

Abstract

This article examines the concept of a safe country of origin within the framework of European Union asylum law and its implementation in the Czech legal order, focusing specifically on the permissibility of territorial and personal exceptions. It analyses Articles 36 and 37 of Directive 2013/32/EU (Procedures Directive) and Annex I thereto, which set out the material and procedural conditions under which Member States may designate a third country as safe. The study explores the legal consequences of such designation for applicants for international protection, including the use of accelerated procedures, the shifting of the burden of proof, and limitations on the suspensive effect of appeals. Particular attention is paid to the tension between procedural efficiency and the obligation to ensure effective judicial protection and compliance with the principle of non-refoulement. The core of the article critically assesses the practice of certain Member States, including the Czech Republic, of introducing territorial or personal exceptions when designating safe countries of origin. It evaluates whether such exceptions are compatible with EU law, especially in light of the legislative history of Directive 2013/32/EU and the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, notably the Grand Chamber judgment of 4 October 2024 in Case C-406/22 (CV). The article concludes that the designation of only part of a country as safe is incompatible with EU and it reflects on the implications of this finding for national asylum systems and the principle of equality of applicants.