The police like former applicants for military officers
REASONS FOR DECISION:
1.1. According to his information, the complainant (hereinafter BF), an Indian citizen from the state of Haryana, entered Austria irregularly and assisted by a tractor on August 16, 2015 and submitted an application for international protection within the meaning of Section 2 (1) on August 19, 2015 Z 13 Asylum Act 2005 (hereinafter AsylG).
1.2. In its first survey on 08/20/2015 by the public security service of the State Police Directorate Lower Austria, Police Detention Center (PAZ) St. Pölten, the BF essentially stated the following in the presence of an interpreter for the Punjabi language:
He comes from XXXX (later also XXXX), Karnal District, Haryana Province, is a member of the Hanjra ethnic group and the Sikhs' religious community and is single. He attended elementary school for three years and speaks Punjabi. His passport is at home in India.
He was said to have flown from New Delhi to Istanbul with the help of a tractor and then traveled to Austria in various vehicles via countries he did not know, finally via Hungary, where he was picked up by the authorities and treated with identification services.
As a reason for fleeing, the BF stated that his father had married another woman. This had the entire property of the family overwritten. She was mean to the BF and his birth mother. He brought the mother to her brother and left India.
The mother is diabetic and he wants to earn money here to be able to pay for her treatment. In the event of his return, he feared "actually nothing".
1.3. The Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum (hereinafter BFA) conducted consultations in accordance with the Dublin III Regulation with the Member State Hungary regarding responsibility for the BF's asylum procedure, which resulted in negative results. The BF was admitted to the asylum procedure.
1.4. During his interview on October 5th, 2016 in front of the BFA, Regional Directorate Lower Austria in Traiskirchen, in the presence of an interpreter for the Punjabi language, the BF confirmed the accuracy of the information he had given so far.
When asked, the BF provided information about his living conditions and those of his relatives in India. He does not have a good relationship with his father, but has a good relationship with his grandfather, mother and brother. The family owns houses. With regard to his passport, he now stated - contrary to his statement in the first survey - that the smuggler had taken it with him. He went to school for five (and not three) years and was a chauffeur (car, truck) by profession. He went to Austria because he had heard that this country was beautiful. He borrowed the travel expenses of around 8,000 - 9,000 euros from a bank.
The BF also stated that his father had reported that he had stolen his money. Therefore, there is now an arrest warrant against the BF. The BF also stated (excerpt from the hearing transcript, spelling mistake partially corrected):
"My father didn't let me work there anymore. Wherever I called and wanted to apply, my father called and said that they shouldn't give me a job. My father and his friends have deliberately caused accidents and are into that Driven a company car when I had work.
LA [Head of Office]: Why didn't your father want you to work?
VP [party to the proceedings]: Because I told my father not to marry the other woman. My father has a second wife.
LA: How long have your parents been separated?
VP: For about eight years.
LA: Did you move away with your mother right away?
VP: We all moved away together. My mother, my brother and me.
LA: You said you live in different districts. How was it possible for your father to prevent you from applying for a job and to cause accidents?
VP: The place of work where I worked is not far from my father's house.
LA: Do you mean your last job now?
LA: How did you lose your job? How long have you stopped working?
VP: There was a little accident and my boss thought it was my fault. I lost my job two years before leaving.
LA: How was it possible for your father to prevent your application from applying and to cause accidents?
VP: My father has very good connections in his district. If someone saw me, they would call my father and say that I work there.
LA: How did the accident happen that caused you to lose your job?
VP: The accident happened, I lost my job. Then I lived in the Sikh temple for two years.
LA: Did you live with your grandfather too?
VP: No, I didn't live there. I lived in the Sikh temple.
LA: Why not?
VP: When I was working, I was living with a friend. Then I lost my job and lived in the Sikh temple.
LA: Why didn't you live with your grandfather?
VP: Because my grandfather couldn't have afforded it.
LA: In your opinion, what was the last decisive reason for you to flee?
VP: My father and his friends were watching me. I thought they were going to kill me.
LA: Did you have any other reasons to flee?
LA: Did you have economic reasons for leaving your home country?
LA: What would you fear if you returned to your home state? What would you expect there?
VP: I'm just afraid of my father.
LA: Would you have the opportunity to go somewhere else in your home country in order to evade the attacks / problems / difficulties mentioned? or have you already considered / tried this - e.g. in another area or would this possibility exist now?
VP: I ran away for two years. Then my mother asked me how I could live like this. She said that it is better to go abroad.
LA: What would have to happen so that you can return to your home country, India?
VP: My father will surely kill me.
LA: Can't you make up with him?
VP: My father doesn't talk to me, my mother and the brother. "
The BF was given "16 pages of state statements" and given the opportunity to comment on them within a period of time.
In the proceedings before the BFA, the BF did not submit any evidence or evidence of his identity or allegations that he had escaped, or any further requests for evidence.
1.5. After carrying out the investigation, the BFA rejected the BF's application for international protection from September 18, 2015 in accordance with Section 3 (1) in conjunction with Section 2 (1) no.13 AsylG (point I) in a ruling dated November 18, 2016, recognized him the status of a person entitled to asylum as well as the status of a person entitled to subsidiary protection in relation to the country of origin India in accordance with Section 8 (1) in conjunction with Section 2 (1) no.13 AsylG (ruling point II.) and combined this decision in ruling point III. according to § 10 Abs. 1 Z 3 AsylG in connection with § 9 BFA-VG with a return decision according to § 52 Abs. 2 Z 2 FPG. He was not granted a residence permit for reasons worthy of consideration in accordance with § 57 and 55 AsylG. It was established that the deportation of the BF to India was permissible according to § 46 FPG. According to § 55 Paragraphs 1 to 3 FPG, the deadline for voluntary departure of the BF is 14 days after the return decision becomes final (point IV.).
In the reasoning for the decision, the authority concerned made statements on the person of the BF and on the situation in his country of origin. There was no asylum-related persecution and the BF's arguments were unbelievable. He had not made any persecution within the meaning of the AsylG credible and there were no valid reasons against deporting the BF to India. In the event of his return, there is no danger that would justify granting subsidiary protection.
The BF does not meet the requirements for the issuing of a residence title according to § 57 AsylG, the issuance of a return decision does not preclude his right to respect for private or family life in view of the short duration of stay and the lack of family or private ties in Germany and it comes from this the issuing of a residence permit in accordance with Section 55 AsylG is also out of the question. In view of the negative decision on the application for international protection, the deportation of the BF to India is permissible. The deadline for voluntary departure of 14 days results from § 55 FPG, since there are no special circumstances that the BF has to take into account when regulating his personal circumstances.
In order to provide evidence, the BFA (summarized) stated that the BF would be credible with regard to its alleged region of origin, nationality and nationality due to its language and local knowledge - in contrast to its escape claims.
The statements on the situation in India would be credible because they came from reliable, reputable, up-to-date and unobjectionable sources, the content of which was conclusive and free of contradictions.
The BFA stated, among other things, about his escape allegations (excerpt from the reasoning for the decision, spelling mistakes partially corrected):
" As part of your first questionnaire on 08/20/2015, you cited the reason for your escape that your father married another woman. She had the entire family property written in her name. She was mean to you and your birth mother Brought your mother to her brother's house and left India, but you have no other reasons to flee.
In the course of your interview before the BFA, in addition to the reasons given in the initial survey, you also stated that you had economic reasons for leaving the country. Your father stopped letting you work in your home district because you told him not to marry the other woman. He called positions where you had applied and persuaded potential employers not to give you a job. Your father and his friends intentionally caused accidents and drove into your company car when you had a job.
When asked by the interview manager, you stated that your parents had been separated for about eight years, but that you only lost your last job two years ago. There was a little accident back then and your boss thought it was your fault. After that accident you would have lived in the Sikh temple. When you worked, you would have lived with a friend.  Elsewhere, however, you mentioned that you moved away from your father together with your mother and brother. It has not been possible to determine how long you lived with your grandfather after your parents separated. In any case, your last job was in the same district as your father's place of residence.
With regard to the job search, you also stated that your father was informed if you had worked for a job and someone saw you there. You justified this with the very good relations your father had in his district . Your father and friends would have monitored you and you would even have believed that they wanted to kill you. However, they say that you have not had a job for the past two years and have lived in the Sikh temple .
When asked whether there was an arrest warrant against you, you answered in the affirmative because your father had reported that you had stolen his money and ran away. Elsewhere, when you were asked whether you could have gone somewhere else in your home country to avoid your difficulties, you stated that you had run away for two years. When your mother asked you how you could live like this, she said that it would be better for you to go abroad . You didn't mention that your father had accused you of stealing money. As previously asked, you would have borrowed the money for your escape from the bank . In view of your previously mentioned unemployment, it is unclear where the money for your escape actually came from.
Your statements are inadequate and unbelievable.  "
If the alleged events had actually happened in the manner you described, it can be assumed that the BF would have chosen a more detailed, livelier narrative style. In addition, in this case his stories would certainly have been more detailed and comprehensible, especially since he would have attended school for five years. It is not credible that the BF came to Austria because of persecution or fear of such persecution, but rather it should be assumed that he had visited the Austrian federal territory because of the wish for a better economic situation.
The reasons for his departure may therefore have been in the purely economic area, namely the improvement of his living situation, but persecution of his person could not have been credibly demonstrated for the above-mentioned reasons.
In addition, the BF would have the option of a domestic flight alternative, as emerged from the state findings.
1.6. With a letter from his representative dated December 7th, 2016, the BF filed a timely appeal against this decision with the Federal Administrative Court (hereinafter referred to as BVwG) due to "errors in content, procedural defects and incorrect legal assessment".
The BF requested that the BVwG may
1. amend the contested decision so that it is granted the status of person entitled to asylum; in eventu
2. amend the decision so that it is granted subsidiary protection status; in eventu
3. Modify the decision so that a "residence permit for reasons worthy of consideration in accordance with Sections 55, 56 and 57 AsyG" will be granted to him, in addition
4. Revoke the return decision pronounced against him and the decision on the admissibility of deportation to India, in eventu
5. extend the deadline for voluntary departure, in eventu
6. Revoke the decision and refer it back to "the first instance" for a new hearing
7. Arrange an oral hearing before the BVwG
8. Grant suspensive effect to the complaint.
In the grounds of the complaint, the BF's submissions - namely those from the interrogation of the parties before the BFA - were repeated in a very brief summary. There are no further explanations.
2. Taking of evidence:
In order to establish the facts relevant to the decision, evidence was collected during the preliminary investigation by:
* Inspection of the administrative act of the BFA available to the BVwG, including the minutes of the first survey on August 20, 2015 and the hearing before the BFA on October 5, 2016 as well as the complaint of December 7, 2016
* Inspection of sources of documentation regarding the country of origin of the BF in the first authority procedure (evidently excerpt from the country information sheet of the state documentation, file pages 159 to 255).
The BF has not submitted any evidence or other evidence for his allegations to escape or his stated identity.
3. Result of the investigation (factual findings):
The following findings were made plausible on the basis of the evidence listed in point 2:
3.1. About the BF:
The BF bears the name XXXX, born on XXXX, is an Indian citizen, belongs to the Hanjri ethnic group, is a member of the Sikhs' religious community and is single. He attended school for five years and worked as a chauffeur in India for six years. His family members still live in India. The BF is in contact with some of them.
3.2. The BF's reasons for fleeing:
3.2.1. According to his own statements, the BF was never imprisoned in his country of origin, has no previous conviction and had no problems with the authorities in his country of origin because of his religion or ethnic group membership. The BF was not politically active and did not belong to any political party.
3.2.2. The BF has argued that his father married another woman who was mean to him and his mother (information from the first interview) and that he was being persecuted in this respect, and that his father was preventing the BF from getting a job or him wanted to kill (information during his interrogation before the BFA) not made credible. Especially since such a threat would not be asylum-relevant even if it were assumed to be true, the BF's asylum-related reasons for leaving his home country could not be made credible.
3.2.3. The BF could not credibly convey that he would be exposed to persecution for asylum-related reasons if he returned to his country of origin.
3.3. Domestic escape or protection alternative:
In the event that his submissions are made true, the BF has a reasonable domestic alternative for escape or protection at his disposal.
India is the seventh largest country in the world with over a billion inhabitants (ÖB 12.2016).It can be assumed that those affected can escape any kind of private / semi-public problems by fleeing to another part of the country, as it cannot be assumed that residents or local authorities beyond the village can receive or research information or are even interested in what a newcomer might have done in the past. There is no central filing or exchange of information. All that is required is a very simple, public name change procedure to disguise one's identity (AA 03.03.2014).
There is no state reporting or registration system, so a large part of the population does not have an identity card. This favors the establishment in another part of the country in case of persecution. Even with ongoing criminal prosecution, it is not uncommon for a person to live undisturbed in rural districts in another part of the country without the person having to hide their identity (AA 08/16/2016). Whether the person concerned has the opportunity to make a living there after the resettlement depends solely on their own initiative (AA 03.03.2014).
In the big cities, however, the police are better staffed and better equipped, so that the possibility of being tracked down is greater there. Well-known personalities ("high profile" people) cannot escape persecution by moving to another part of the country, but less well-known people ("low profile" people) can (ÖB 12.2016).
(Excerpt from the state information sheet of the state documentation of the BFA from January 9th, 2017)
Even with the assumption that his stepmother is mean to him or his mother or that his father prevents him from getting a job or wants to kill him, it is not understandable why the BF did not accept such persecution as part of a domestic escape alternative could have withdrawn permanently. This results from the uniform reporting situation.
The BF stated - for the first time in his interrogation before the BFA - that there was an arrest warrant against him because his father had reported that he had stolen money from him; However, this does not appear credible, so that it can be assumed that the BF is not to be found on the national wanted list of the police.
Due to a lack of reporting and identification requirements, the police are not able to find a person who is moving in India if the criminal is not wanted nationwide. The search for people is made much more difficult by the lack of a mandatory India-wide reporting system and the lack of identification.
All the less there is a real danger that a private person can find their enemy, who has moved across India. In any case, entry into India is possible for the BF.
This fact favors the establishment in another part of the country (even) in the case of persecution or criminal prosecution without the person having to hide their identity and depending on the individual abilities such as language, knowledge and physical condition.
In India, according to the last census in 2011, there are almost 21 million Sikhs across the country, around 1.7% of the Indian population. Sikhs form the majority in the state of Punjab with around 16 million.
Outside of Punjab, a community of Sikhs is represented in almost all other major Indian cities, as the cities are very multicultural. There are particularly large Sikh communities in Delhi and in the Udham Singh Nagar district in the state of Uttarakhand as well as in the states of Jammu, Rajasthan, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh, which border on Punjab.
(ACCORD - Austrian Center for Country of Origin and Asylum Research and Documentation: Inquiry response on India: Situation of the Sikhs [a 9850-1 (9850)], 09/21/2016 (available on ecoi.net) http: //www.ecoi. net / local_link / 329937 / 470995_de.html (accessed on December 2nd, 2016)
In India, freedom of movement and settlement is legally guaranteed and practically respected by the authorities; In some border areas, however, special residence permits are necessary. Sikhs from the Punjab have the opportunity to settle in other parts of the country, and Sikh communities are scattered across the country. Temporary emergencies can be compensated for by feeding the poor in the temple, especially the Sikh temples, which also provide accommodation for smaller services (AA 08/16/2016). Sikhs can practice their religion in any part of the country without restriction. Active members of banned militant Sikh groups such as Babbar Khalsa International must expect police persecution (ÖB 12.2016).
(Excerpt from the state information sheet of the state documentation of the BFA from January 9th, 2017)
The Identification Authority of India was established to provide the legal and technical infrastructure necessary to issue all Indian residents with a 12-digit Identity Number (UID) that can be verified online. This project aims to rule out fake and duplicate identities. The new identity system will be linked to photos, demographic and biometric details (fingerprints and iris image). The acquisition of a UID is voluntary and free of charge. There is no legal obligation to register (UK Home Office 2.2015).
(Excerpt from the state information sheet of the state documentation of the BFA from January 9th, 2017)
Since the BF - he is young, of working age, male, in good health and able to work, has attended school for five years and has several years of professional experience as a chauffeur - in any case, he is able to get ahead in India, it is also reasonable for him to face any persecution to escape by using a domestic escape or protection alternative.
3.4. To integrate the BF in Austria:
The BF has no right of residence in Austria outside of the right of asylum, and he never had any other right than the temporary right of residence as an asylum seeker in Austria.
The BF has no family members or relatives in Austria relevant to Article 8 of the ECHR. Any friendly relationships in Austria only arose at a point in time when the BF had to be aware of his uncertain legal status.
The BF does not attend any courses, schools or universities in Austria. He has not proven any knowledge of German.
The BF is criminally harmless in Austria. The existence of serious administrative violations is not known. The BF entered the federal territory irregularly.
There is no particular integration of the BF in Austria.
3.5. The situation in the BF's country of origin:
3.5.1. Based on the sources of information on the BF's country of origin, it is certain that there is the death penalty in this country. However, the results of the investigation did not reveal that the BF would be subject to a real risk in this regard and the BF did not claim either.
3.5.2 On the general situation in India or in the state of Punjab (excerpt from the country information sheet of the state documentation of the BFA from January 9, 2017, spelling mistake partially corrected):
Overview of the political situation:
With over 1.2 billion people and a multi-religious and multi-ethnic society, India is the most populous democracy in the world (CIA Factbook 12.12.2016; see also: AA 16.08.2016, BBC 27.09.2016). The diversity of India - also linguistically - is also reflected in its federal political system, in which power is shared by the central government and the states (BBC 09/27/2016). The central government has significantly greater powers than the state governments (AA 9.2016a). In accordance with the constitution, the states and union territories have a high degree of autonomy and have primary responsibility for law and order (USDOS 04/13/2016). The capital New Delhi has a special legal status (AA 9.2016a).
The separation of powers between parliament and government corresponds to the British model (AA 08/16/2016), the principle of the separation of powers between the legislative, executive and judicial branches is enforced (AA 9.2016a). The independence of the judiciary, which has a three-tier instance, is constitutionally guaranteed (AA 08/16/2016).
India is a parliamentary democracy and has a multi-party system and a bicameral parliament (USDOS 04/13/2016). The legislature consists of a People's Chamber (Lok Sabha) and a Chamber of States (Rajya Sabha). In addition, there are parliaments at the state level (AA 08/16/2016).
The President is the head of state and is elected by an electoral committee, while the Prime Minister is the head of government (USDOS 04/13/2016). The office of president primarily entails representative tasks, but in the event of a crisis the president has far-reaching powers. President Pranab Kumar Mukherjee has been Indian head of state since July 2012 (AA 9.2016a). However, the prime minister holds the most important office within the executive (GIZ 11.2016).
The new government, which has been in office since 2014, not only wants to continue the market economy course, but also to intensify it by removing bureaucratic obstacles and reducing protectionism. Foreign investors should become more active (GIZ 12.2016).
India is rich in tensions across ethnic groups, religions, castes and life perspectives. Contradictions, contradictions or conflicts are discharged in the social arenas and are taken up, processed and in some cases instrumentalized by politics (GIZ 11.2016). Bloody terrorist attacks have repeatedly claimed deaths in India's megacities in the past few years (Eurasisches Magazin, May 24, 2014). The tensions in the north-east of the country continue, as does the dispute with the Naxalites (GIZ 11.2016). The state's monopoly on the use of force is being called into question in some areas by the activities of the "Naxalites" (AA 08/16/2016).
Terrorist attacks in recent years (December 2010 in Varanasi, July 2011 Mumbai, September 2011 New Delhi and Agra, April 2013 in Bangalore, May 2014 Chennai and December 2014 Bangalore) and in particular the attacks in Mumbai in November 2008 have put the government under pressure set. Only a few of the attacks in recent years have been completely cleared up, and the reform projects announced in response to these incidents to improve the Indian security architecture have not been implemented consistently (AA April 24, 2015). The South Asia Terrorism Portal recorded 1,073 deaths from terrorism-related violence in 2011, 803 in 2012, 885 in 2013, 976 in 2014, 722 in 2015 and 835 in 2016 [Note : the figures quoted include civilians, security forces and terrorists] (SATP 01/09/2017).
Conflict regions are Jammu and Kashmir, the northeastern regions and the Maoist belt. Attacks by Maoist rebels on security forces and infrastructure continued in Jharkhand and Bihar. In Punjab, violent opponents of the government repeatedly led to assassinations and bomb attacks. In addition to the Islamist terrorists, the Naxalites (Maoist underground fighters) contribute to the destabilization of the country. From Chattisgarh they fight in many union states (from Bihar in the north to Andrah Pradesh in the south) with armed force against state institutions. In the north-east of the country, numerous separatist groups are fighting against state power and demanding either independence or more autonomy (United Liberation Front Assom, National Liberation Front Tripura, National Socialist Council Nagaland, Manipur People’s Liberation Front etc.). Hindu radicalism, which is directed against minorities such as Muslims and Christians, is seldom officially classified in the category of terror, but rather referred to as "communal violence" (ÖB 12.2016).
The government acts with great severity and consistency against militant groups, who mostly advocate the independence of certain regions and / or adhere to radical views. If such groups renounce violence, negotiations about their demands are usually possible. Nonviolent independence groups are free to be politically active (AA 08/16/2016).
In India, many fundamental rights and freedoms are constitutionally enshrined, and the constitutionally guaranteed independent Indian judiciary remains much more important guarantee of rights. However, the often long duration of proceedings due to overburdened and understaffed courts as well as widespread corruption, especially in criminal proceedings, significantly limit legal security (AA 08/16/2016; cf. also:
USDOS 04/13/2016). A generally discriminatory criminal prosecution or sentencing practice cannot be determined, however, the lower levels in particular are not free from corruption (AA April 24, 2015).
The judiciary continues to be overburdened and the backlog in the courts leads to long delays or withholding of justice. An analysis by the Ministry of Justice revealed a vacancy of 34% of the judges' positions at the higher courts on August 1st, 2015 (USDOS April 13th, 2016). The standard duration of criminal proceedings (from the indictment to the judgment) is several years; in some cases, proceedings take up to ten years. Witness protection is also inadequate. As a result, witnesses in court often do not testify freely because they were bribed or threatened (AA 08/16/2016; see also: USDOS 04/13/2016).
The Indian Police Service is not a direct law enforcement or law enforcement agency (BICC 6/2016) and is subordinate to the states (AA 08/16/2016). Rather, it acts as a training and recruiting agency for police officers in the states. With regard to the federal structures, the police are organized decentrally in the individual states. However, given a national police law, numerous national criminal laws and the central executive recruitment office, the individual units have a number of things in common. In general, the police are entrusted with prosecuting, preventing and combating crime, and maintaining public order, while at the same time exercising partial control over the various secret services. Within the police there is a Criminal Investigation Department (CID), in which a special unit (Special Branch) is integrated. While the former is entrusted with national and interstate crimes, the task of the special unit is to gather information and monitor all subversive elements and persons. In almost every state, special police units have been set up to deal with women and children. Most of the law enforcement agencies are controlled by the Ministry of Home Affairs (BICC 6.2016).
In addition to structural deficits, a lack of trust in the reliability of the police arises from frequent reports of human rights violations such as torture, extrajudicial killings and threats that were allegedly perpetrated by the police (BICC 6/2016; see also: USDOS April 13, 2016). The police remain overworked, underpaid and exposed to political pressure, which in some cases leads to corruption. (USDOS 04/13/2016). Promised police reforms were delayed again in 2015 (HRW January 27, 2016).
The effectiveness of law enforcement and security forces varies widely across the country. While there are cases of police officers / officers who act with impunity at all levels, there have also been cases in which security officers were held accountable for their illegal actions (USDOS April 13, 2016).
The Indian military is subordinate to civil administration and has shown little interest in a political role in the past. The supreme command is incumbent on the president. According to their self-image, the army is the "protector of the nation", but only in a military sense (BICC 6.2016). The military can be deployed domestically if this is necessary to maintain internal security (AA 08/16/2016; cf. also: BICC 6.2016), for example in the fight against armed insurgents, supporting the police and paramilitary units, and deploying in the event of natural disasters (BICC 6/2016).
The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) is used as the legal basis for the deployment of armed forces - especially land forces - in unrest areas and against terrorists. The AFSPA gives the armed forces extensive powers to use lethal force, make arrests without a warrant, and search without a warrant. In their actions, those involved in the armed forces enjoy broad immunity from prosecution. The AFSPA comes into play after state governments declare their states or only parts of them to be "unrest areas" on the basis of the Disturbed Areas Act. The states of Jammu and Kashmir and the northeastern states of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Meghalaya, Manipur, Mizoram and Nagaland are currently considered unrest areas (AA 08/16/2016 cf. USDOS 06/25/2015).
Among other things, in the left-wing extremist groups (so-called.Naxalites) affected federal states of central India, the paramilitary units deployed in India are largely subordinate to the Ministry of the Interior (AA 08/16/2016). These include in particular the National Security Guard (NSG), a special force for personal protection made up of members of the army and the police, also known as the "Black Cat", the Rahtriya Rifles, a special force for protecting traffic and communication links in the event of civil unrest and to fight armed rebellions, the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) - the Federal Reserve Police, a militarily equipped police force for special operations - the Border Security Force (BSF - Federal Border Guard), as the largest and best-equipped militia to protect the borders with Pakistan , Bangladesh and Myanmar. But it is also used to maintain internal order in other parts of the country. In addition, the Assam Rifles - responsible for border defense in the northeast -, the Indo-Tibetan Border Force (ITBP) as the Indo-Tibetan border police and the Coast Guard, the Railway Protective Force to protect the national railways and the Central Industrial Security Force, belong to the security of the State-owned companies (ÖB 12.2016). Particularly in unrest areas, the security forces have extensive powers to combat secessionist and terrorist groups, which are often used excessively (AA 08/16/2016).
The Special Frontier Force is subordinate to the Prime Minister's Office. The so-called border special forces are an elite unit that is deployed on sensitive sections of the border with China. There are also legal bases for the actions of the secret services, the so-called "Intelligence Bureau" (domestic secret service) and the research and analysis wing ("Research and Analysis Wing" - foreign secret service) (AA 04/24/2015; cf. also USDOS 06/25. 2015).
The "Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act" (UAPA) has been tightened. The changes include an expanded definition of terrorism and, in cases related to terrorism, the possibility of extending pre-trial detention without charge from 90 to 180 days and simplified rules for proving the perpetrator of a defendant (which in fact come close to reversing the burden of proof) (AA April 24, 2015) .
General human rights situation:
India signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 (AA 08/16/2016). National legislation on human rights matters is broad. All important human rights are constitutionally guaranteed (ÖB 12.2016). However, the implementation of these guarantees is often not fully guaranteed (AA 16.08.2016). However, a number of security laws limit the rule of law guarantees, e.g. the right to a fair trial. These laws were tightened after the Mumbai terrorist attacks in November 2008; i.a. the presumption of innocence was suspended for certain criminal offenses.
The main human rights problems are abuse by police and security forces, including extrajudicial executions, torture and rape. Corruption remains widespread and contributes to the ineffective fight against crime, in particular crimes against women, children and members of registered castes and tribes as well as social violence based on gender, religion, caste or tribal affiliation (USDOS April 13, 2016).
The human rights situation in India varies greatly from region to region (BICC 6/2016), a generalized assessment is hardly possible:
Drastic violations of fundamental rights and deficits in the rule of law coexist with extensive civil liberties, progressive laws and committed initiatives by civil society. Above all, the reality of the lower social classes, who make up the majority of the population, is often characterized by violations of fundamental rights and discrimination (AA 08/16/2016). Many human rights violations in India are caused by deeply rooted social practices such as the caste system (AA 08/16/2016). Women, members of ethnic and religious minorities and lower castes are systematically discriminated against (BICC 6/2016). While civil and human rights are largely respected by the government, the situation in regions where there are internal conflicts is sometimes very bad. This is particularly true of Jammu and Kashmir and the northeast of the country. The security forces, but also the non-state armed groups, be they separatist organizations or militias loyal to the government, are accused of massive human rights violations. The military and paramilitary units are charged with kidnapping, torture, rape, arbitrary arrest and extrajudicial executions. The security forces are accused of partiality, particularly with regard to the tensions between Hindus and Muslims, which led to thousands of deaths in 2002. The mood is fueled by Hindu nationalist parties, which are also represented in the government (BICC 6.2016).
Separatist rebels and terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir, the northeastern states and the Maoist Belt commit serious human rights violations, including the killings of civilians, police officers, armed forces and government officials. Insurgents are responsible for numerous cases of kidnapping, torture, rape, extortion and the use of child soldiers (USDOS April 13, 2016).
The authorities continue to violate citizens' privacy. In some states, law restricts religious conversion and there have been reports of arrests but no convictions under that law. Some restrictions on freedom of movement persist (USDOS 04/13/2016).
In October 1993, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) was established. Its statutes contain the protection of the Human Rights Act of 1993. The commission embodies India's concern for the protection of human rights. It is independent and was established by an implementing law of the parliament. The NHRC has the power of a civil court (NHRC undated). The NHRC recommends that the Criminal Investigation Bureau investigate all murders in which the alleged suspects were killed during their indictment, arrest, or attempted escape. Many states have not followed this non-binding advice and conducted internal audits at the discretion of their managers. The NHRC guidelines direct state governments to report all police deaths to the NHRC within 48 hours, but many state governments did not adhere to these guidelines. The NHRC asked state governments to provide financial compensation to the families of victims, but state governments did not consistently comply with these guidelines. Authorities have not asked the armed forces to report deaths while in custody to the NHRC (USDOS 04/13/2016).
Freedom of movement:
The law grants nationwide freedom of movement, international travel, migration and repatriation, and the government generally respects these rights (USDOS 04/13/2016). The state's monopoly on the use of force is being called into question in some areas by the activities of the "Naxalites". Apart from that, freedom of movement within the country is guaranteed (AA 08/16/2016).
The government relaxed restrictions on travel to Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Mizoram, Manipur and parts of Jammu and Kashmir, except for foreigners from Pakistan, China and Burma. The Department of the Interior and state governments require that citizens obtain special permits prior to travel to travel to certain restricted areas or restricted areas. The security forces examine cars and their owners at checkpoints in the Kashmir Valley, before public events in New Delhi or after major terrorist attacks (USDOS April 13, 2016).
The government may refuse to legally issue a passport to an applicant believed to be involved in out-of-country activities that are "detrimental to the sovereignty and integrity of the nation". Citizens of Jammu and Kashmir continue to face massive delays in issuing passports, often up to two years before the State Department issues or renews their passports. The government reportedly subjects applicants born in Jammu and Kashmir, including children of military officers, to additional checks before they are issued a passport (USDOS 08/16/2016).
With the planned data network system for the central security authorities and the Union states, Crime and Criminal Tracking Network System (CCTNS), an exchange of information at all levels should be guaranteed in the future. A connection of 15,000 police stations and 6,000 higher-level agencies was planned for 2012. However, the implementation of the ambitious project is far behind the original schedule (AA 03/03/2014).
India is the seventh largest country in the world with over a billion inhabitants (ÖB 12.2016). It can be assumed that those affected can escape any kind of private / semi-public problems by fleeing to another part of the country, as it cannot be assumed that residents or local authorities beyond the village can receive or research information or are even interested in it. what a newcomer might have done in the past. There is no central filing or exchange of information. All that is required is a very simple, public name change procedure to disguise one's identity (AA 03.03.2014).
There is no state reporting or registration system, so a large part of the population does not have an identity card. This favors the establishment in another part of the country in case of persecution. Even with ongoing criminal prosecution, it is not uncommon for a person to live undisturbed in rural districts in another part of the country without the person having to hide their identity (AA 08/16/2016). Whether the person concerned has the opportunity to make a living there after the resettlement depends solely on their own initiative (AA 03.03.2014).
In the big cities, however, the police are better staffed and better equipped, so that the possibility of being tracked down is greater there. Well-known personalities ("high profile" people) cannot avoid persecution by moving to another part of the country, but less well-known people ("low profile" people) can (ÖB 12.2016).
Around a quarter of the population lives below the subsistence level. Unless there are extraordinary natural disasters, however, a sufficient food supply for survival is fundamentally ensured even for the weakest parts of the population. There are no state reception facilities for returnees, social assistance or any other social network. Returnees depend on the support of family or friends.
Temporary emergencies can be compensated for by feeding the poor in the temple, especially the Sikh temples, which also provide accommodation for smaller services (AA 08/16/2016).
The structure of India's health system is diverse. Under the Indian Constitution, the various states have control over most aspects of health care, including public health and hospitals. Around 80% of the financing of the public health system comes from the states (BAMF 12.2015).
Basic health care is provided by the state free of charge. However, it is consistently inadequate (AA 08/16/2016) and does not include free health care for the entire population (BAMF 08/2014). State hospitals offer health care free of charge or at very low cost (BAMF 12.2015).
State health centers form the basis of the public health system. These are mostly one-man clinics that also offer small operations. These centers can generally be found in the vicinity of all villages. In total there are more than 23,000 such clinics in India. Community Health Centers are available as the base of health care in urban areas. Taluk hospitals are operated by the government and the responsible Taluk [note: administrative unit]. District hospitals (District level hospitals) and specialized clinics are equipped for all possible health issues (BAMF 12.2015).
The private sector also has an essential role in health care (BAMF 12.2015), and since the demand for services from the state sector is very high, many are turning to private providers for better or faster treatment. The private healthcare providers enjoy a better reputation because of the more advanced infrastructure and qualified staff. There are medical facilities in all major cities where vital treatments can be carried out. With the restrictions mentioned, this also applies to the public area (AA 08/16/2016). A few private hospitals in the largest cities guarantee a standard that is comparable to that of western industrialized countries. In the economically strong Punjab and New Delhi, health care is good in relation to other parts of the country (AA 08/16/2016). Private health care is comparably expensive, and the majority of the costs are paid by the patients and their families themselves. A valid personal ID is required to access the services (Adhaar card, Voter ID, PAN, driving license) (BAMF 12.2015).
Several insurance companies offer health insurance that covers certain medical expenses, including inpatient hospitalization. The coverage varies depending on the insurance policy (BAMF 8.2014). The state health insurance (Universal Health Insurance Scheme) only covers Indian citizens below the poverty line. For the rest of the population, health insurance is subject to contributions through various private and state companies at different conditions. Well-known insurers are General Insurance, Bharti AAA, HDFC ERGO, Bajaj, Religare, Apollo Munich, New India Assurance, Max Bupa etc. There are also many charitable institutions that offer affordable treatments (BAMF 12.2015).
Almost all common drugs are available on the market in India (AA 08/16/2016). Drug stores are numerous in India and are also available in remote cities. (BAMF 12.2015). Medicines can be imported from abroad. India is the world's largest producer of generic drugs, and drugs cost a fraction of the prices in Europe (AA 08/16/2016). The costs for the most necessary drugs are controlled by the state so that they are widely available (BAMF 12.2015).
Treatment after return:
The mere fact that a person has applied for asylum in Germany does not lead to any adverse consequences after deportation. In recent years, Indian asylum seekers who have been deported to their home country have generally had no problems - apart from an intensive review of (replacement) travel documents and a questioning by the security authorities. However, persons wanted by the police must expect arrest and handover to the security authorities upon entry (AA 16.08.2016). The Indian government has no reintegration program and no other financial or administrative support for returnees (BAMF 12.2015).
Authenticity of the documents:
Access to forged documents or genuine documents with false content is easy. Many documents are available for payment. Access is also made easier by the ability to change names with little effort. In view of the unreliability of the document system, Indian public documents have not been legalized by German diplomatic missions abroad since 2000 (AA 08/16/2016).
Real documents with untrue content:
Genuine documents with untrue content are easily obtainable (against payment or as a courtesy). Civil status documents are genuine documents with false content, while court decisions (e.g. divorce, custody) are genuine judgments, which, however, are made on the basis of invented facts and without compliance with basic procedural requirements (legal hearing, weighing of interests, reasons) (AA 08/16/2016).
Access to forged documents:
The German embassy in New Delhi is very rarely presented with documents for review in the context of ongoing asylum procedures. In the past, documents in connection with criminal matters and searches, as well as the associated affidavits, have also turned out to be false or forged. Checking the authenticity of arrest warrants is difficult. Documents presented ("Warrant of Arrest", "First Investigation Report", letters of confirmation from lawyers, "Affidavits" from village chiefs or relatives) often turn out to be falsified when checked.Checks in the asylum procedure often show that neither the presentation nor the identity of the person concerned can be confirmed (AA 08/16/2016).
Adhaar / Identification Authority:
As part of a poverty reduction initiative, millions of Indian citizens have been issued an Aadhaar ID number since 2010. Although this is not compulsory, officials stated that not having it could limit access to state aid (FH 10/03/2013). The distinctive identity number enables, for example, government grants to be sent directly to the consumer. Instead of sending it to a bank account, it is transferred to the unique identity number associated with the bank and goes to the relevant bank account. 750 million Indians currently have such an identity number, around 130 million have also linked it to their bank account (International Business Times, 02/02/2015).
The Identification Authority of India was set up to provide the legal and technical infrastructure necessary to issue all Indian residents with a 12-digit Identity Number (UID) that can be verified online. This project aims to eliminate fake and duplicate identities. The new identity system will be linked to photos, demographic and biometric details (fingerprints and iris image). The acquisition of a UID is voluntary and free of charge. There is no legal obligation to register (UK Home Office 2.2015).
Since the data collected as part of the UID or Aadhaar project are not integrated into the national population register (NPR), this is only a list of names and demographic details. So far, 1.04 billion Aadhaar numbers have been generated with the plan the complete registration of the population by March 2017. The authority responsible for the uniform identification number refuses to forward the collected data to the Ministry of the Interior responsible for the population register, as it is excluded from data exchange due to the law passed in July 2016 (HAT 08.08.2016 ).
Punjab [Note: neighboring federal state of the province of origin of the BF, formerly a single federal state]:
According to the Indian Ministry of the Interior on the numbers of the census in 2011, 16 million of the 21 million Sikhs live in Punjab (MoHA undated) and form the majority there (USDOS 08/10/2016).
Terrorism in Punjab almost came to a standstill in the late 1990s. Most of the high-profile members of the various militant groups have left the Punjab and are operating from other Union states or Pakistan. They also receive financial support from Sikh groups in exile in western countries (ÖB 12.2016). Non-state forces, including organized insurgents and terrorists, however, commit numerous murders and bomb attacks in Punjab and conflict regions such as Jammu and Kashmir (USDOS April 13, 2016). In July 2015, members of an armed group attacked a police station and a bus station in Gurdaspur, Punjab state, killing three civilians and four police officers. 15 people were injured (USDOS 07/02/2016; see also: AI 02/24/2016). It was the first major attack since the activities of militant Sikhs in the 1980s and 1990s (USDOS 07/02/2016).
In October 2015, there were widespread and violent Sikh protests against the Punjab government in five districts of Punjab. The police shot at Protestants and killed two people and injured 80 people. The protests were based on reports that unknown perpetrators had desecrated the sacred book of the Sikhs. Police arrested a dozen Protestants for attempted murder, damage to public property and carrying illegal weapons. Legal proceedings have been slow to come to terms with the outbreak of violence in 1984, in which 3,000 people, mostly Sikhs, were killed. Civil society activists and Sikh interest groups remain concerned that the government has not yet been able to hold those responsible to justice (USDOS 08/10/2016).
Pakistan's illegal arms and drug trafficking in Indian Punjab has tripled recently. In May 2007, the Indian secret service became aware of plans by the ISI, which, together with the BKI and other militant Sikh groups, intended to attack cities in the Punjab (Jalandhar, Ludhiana, Pathankot). The security authorities in Punjab have so far been able to successfully neutralize the burgeoning revival of the militant Sikh movement (ÖB 12.2016). In Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab and Manipur, the authorities have special powers to search for and detain people without an arrest warrant (USDOS April 13, 2016; see also:
BBC 10/20/2015). According to human rights reports, there are regular cases of human rights violations, particularly by the security authorities (extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests, torture in police custody, death as a result of torture, etc.) in Punjab (ÖB 12.2016). Honor killings continue to be a problem, especially in the northern states of Haryana and Punjab. Human rights organizations estimate that up to 10% of all killings in these states are so-called honor killings (USDOS April 13, 2016).
The State Human Rights Commission in Punjab has intervened in a series of serious human rights violations by the security forces (torture, torture resulting in death, extrajudicial killings, etc.). In many cases, the authority was obliged to make compensation payments. The Human Rights Commission receives 200 to 300 complaints about human rights violations every day and is overwhelmed in its capacity. Often the undercastes or casteless are victims of police arbitrariness (ÖB 12.2016).
Belonging to the Sikh religion is not a criterion for arbitrary police acts. The Sikhs, 60% of the Punjab's population, make up a significant proportion of the officials, judges, soldiers and security forces in the Punjab. High-ranking positions are also open to them (ÖB 12.2016).
In India, freedom of movement and settlement is legally guaranteed and practically respected by the authorities; In some border areas, however, special residence permits are necessary. Sikhs from the Punjab have the opportunity to settle in other parts of the country, and Sikh communities are scattered across the country. Sikhs can practice their religion in any part of the country without restriction. Active members of banned militant Sikh groups such as Babbar Khalsa International must expect police persecution (ÖB 12.2016).
4. Evidence assessment:
The assessment of the evidence is based on the following decisive considerations:
The course of the proceedings is based on the procedural files of the BFA and the BVwG relating to the case at hand.
4.1. About the BF:
The findings on the identity of the BF result from his information before the BFA and in the complaint.
Insofar as determinations regarding the identity of the BF (name and date of birth) have been made in the present case, these shall only apply to the identification of the BF's person in the asylum procedure.
The findings on nationality and origin, in particular on his ethnic group and religion as well as on the living conditions of the BF, are based on the credible information provided by the BF in the proceedings before the BFA and in the complaint as well as on the knowledge and use of the Punjabi language and the Knowledge of the geographical conditions in India.
Although the BF provided the same information about name and date of birth during the procedure, his identity could not be conclusively clarified due to the lack of submission of unobjectionable identity documents or other relevant means of certification. The name given was quite sufficient for individualization in the process.
4.2. The BF's reasons for fleeing:
The findings on the BF's reasons for leaving his home country are based on the statements made by him before the BFA and in the complaint.
As an event that triggered the escape, the BF submitted in the initial survey that his father had married another woman. This had the entire property of the family overwritten. She was mean to the BF and his birth mother. He brought the mother to her brother and left India. The mother is diabetic and he wants to earn money here to be able to pay for her treatment. In the event of his return, he feared "actually nothing". In his interrogation before the BFA, the BF changed his information on his reasons for fleeing and stated that his father had prevented the BF from getting a job and would also want to kill him.
It should be noted that these reasons for persecution have neither been proven nor substantiated. Therefore, in order to assess whether the reasons for persecution are to be regarded as plausible, the BF's personal credibility and the arguments on the reasons for fleeing must be taken into account.
The assessment of the BF's personal credibility has to take into account whether he was telling the truth about his reasons for fleeing outside of the immediate lecture; Compliance with the obligations to cooperate in accordance with Section 18 (2) AsylG, as set out in Section 15 AsylG, and the other involvement of the BF in the procedure must also be taken into account.
It is up to the BF to describe the circumstances of his escape in a reasonably comprehensible and precise manner. From the information provided by the BF, however, no linear action can be identified that would be objectively suitable for realizing an asylum-related reason for persecution.
Such persecution could not be made credible for the following reasons. The BF made - as the BFA rightly stated - several times implausible, inconsistent and therefore unbelievable statements regarding the reasons for fleeing.
As the first authority stated extensively and correctly in the assessment of the evidence of the contested decision, the BF described his reasons for fleeing differently during the first interview than during his interrogation. While he merely stated in his first questioning that his stepmother was mean to him and his mother, he increased his arguments during his interrogation before the BFA and claimed that his father was preventing him from getting a job and had reported him for theft, why there is an arrest warrant against the BF and wants to kill him at all.
As can be seen from the initial interview and the hearing before the BFA, the BF had sufficient time and opportunity to explain any reasons for flight comprehensively and in detail and to present any evidence or evidence. The BF was also asked several times by the BFA to provide a comprehensive and detailed description of the reasons for his flight and to submit the relevant documents, as well as being instructed about the consequences of incorrect information.
It should be noted that, based on general life experience, it can be assumed that the BF must in principle be able to provide comprehensive and consistent information on the specific circumstances and the reason for leaving the country of origin, especially a person who is from Fear of persecution has left her country of origin, especially in her first interview after a specific questioning about her flight, the opportunity offered to her to explain the circumstances and reasons for her flight in a comprehensive and coherent manner in order to obtain the requested protection from persecution will hardly be missed to be able to receive it as quickly as possible. It is also common experience in life that a rational person who claims to have fled their country of origin out of fear of persecution has significant events in connection with their flight that are memorized in that person's consciousness, even after a long period of time can still provide sufficient concrete, consistent and comprehensible information.
From the vague, imprecise, but above all implausible and unbelievably increased information from the BF, however, no linear action can be identified that is able to induce an (average) person to flee their home country. The BF withdraws to empty phrases and describes memorable periods of life in short sentences.
In his statements, the BF largely limited himself to a few "cornerstones" of the escape history, without being able to comprehensibly report on further details of the events or on details that can be assumed to be known in actual incidents. The statements remain impersonal and show that the BF has no detailed knowledge.
Why his father should want to kill him remained completely unfounded and therefore incomprehensible.
The BF has evidently increased his submissions at the first questioning, which seems to be closest to the truth, during his interrogation before the BFA with unbelievable submissions in order to construct a situation of persecution.
The BF's personal credibility appears through his contradicting statements - for example with regard to his passport (first interview: at home, interview before BFA: taken from the tractor) or the length of his school years (first interview: three years, interview before BFA: five years), above all but also because of his increased information regarding his escape claims - severely impaired.
In addition, the BF, who attended school for five years and worked as a chauffeur for six years, has in no way substantiated his arguments - as well as his identity.
In summary, the escape submission could not be made credible due to constant standing sentences and because of a superficial, impersonal, but above all implausible and contradicting content, especially since it remained completely unconfirmed.
Furthermore, even if his submission is assumed to be true, the behavior of the BF appears to rush to leave his entire previous life behind and to flee into the unknown (to another continent with a different culture and a foreign language) without attempting to Finding an alternative solution linked to staying in one's home country - for example by staying in one of India's numerous megacities, in which one's anonymity would be preserved - is strange and unrealistic.
The submission in the complaint was also unsuitable to support the BF's previous submissions. For the reasons mentioned above, the BF was unable to gain credibility here either. Furthermore, the complaint submission is exhausted in a - brief - repetition of his escape submission, which the BF had already brought before the first authority, without even beginning to prove it.
The authorities' duty to investigate is offset by an obligation on the part of the BF to cooperate. The Administrative Court (VwGH) has consistently recognized that it is necessary for the substantiation of the information that the BF describes the reasons for the threatened treatment or persecution in a concrete and consistent manner, and that these reasons can be objectified, whereby for Fulfillment of the element of "being believable" of the asylum seeker's own statement is of essential importance. This is connected with the duty of the applicant to proactively explain everything that speaks in favor of the application of the requirements and the granting of asylum and to cite specific circumstances in this regard that provide objective evidence that these requirements are met. In this respect, the applicant has an increased duty to cooperate (VwGH 11.11.1991, 91/12/0143, VwGH 13.04.1988, 86/01/0268). The applicant must therefore make credible the existence of a current threat to the relevant legal interests that has at least been approved by state authorities, whereby this current threat situation must be presented by means of specific information relating to the person of the alien, supported by appropriate means of certification (including VwGH 26.06.2997, 95 / 18/1291, VwGH 07/17/1997, 97/18/0336, VwGH 04/05/1995, 93/180289). The duty to cooperate relates at least to those circumstances that are within his sphere of influence and of which the authority cannot obtain knowledge ex officio.
The authority is not obliged to check such inadequate information, which can already be classified as objectively unbelievable, through further surveys. All in all, mere allegations were to be assumed with regard to the reasons for fleeing, so that a closer examination of this information in the BF's home country was not necessary.
The BF is apparently trying to use the institute of asylum, which is so important for people who are really persecuted, for its own purposes and - in circumvention of the otherwise applicable residence law provisions - to obtain a right of residence in Austria.
It corresponds to the constant judicature of the VwGH if reasons that led to leaving the home country or country of origin are generally not regarded as credible if the asylum seeker differs in the course of the proceedings - written interrogations - on the facts that in his opinion constitute an asylum offense or even contradicts itself if its information corresponds to the course of events corresponding to the experience or with actual circumstances orEvents are incompatible and therefore appear improbable, or if he only presents relevant facts very late in the course of the asylum procedure (VwGH 06.03.1996, 95/20/0650).
Since this applies to the information provided by the BF, no further surveys were carried out in the country of origin. Since further reasons for fleeing were neither alleged nor emerged ex officio, it was also to be assumed that the specific escape story that was put forward was not true - apart from the question of whether it met the requirements for granting asylum and his statements were an argument it could be inferred which in itself would constitute persecution within the meaning of the Geneva Refugee Convention (GFK) (see also the statements on point I. of the contested decision under point 126.96.36.199.) - a persecution could not be made credible.
4.3. The situation in the BF's country of origin:
The country determinations on which this finding is based (see point 3.5. Above) are based on reports from various recognized governmental and non-governmental institutions and persons, some of which are locally active, and which, in their statements, give a consistent and coherent overall picture of the situation in India. In view of the seriousness of the cited sources of knowledge and the plausibility of the largely consistent statements, there is no reason to doubt the accuracy of the information. Insofar as the findings are based on reports of an earlier date, it must be stated that since then the circumstances mentioned therein have not changed significantly in a case-relevant manner, taking into account the more recent reports available to the BVwG ex officio for the assessment of the current situation.
In this case, it can be denied that there has been a decisive change in the situation in India in general and relevant to the present case since the issue of the contested decision by the BFA. The situation in India has remained essentially unchanged in this regard for years, as the judging court has assured itself by constantly paying attention to the current source situation (e.g. by looking into current reports).
The BF did not comment on the country reports handed over to him during his interrogation. In his complaint, he did not dispute the reports cited in the notification.
5. Legal assessment:
5.1. Applicable law:
The procedural provisions of the AVG, the BFA-VG, the VwGVG and those contained in the AsylG as well as the material provisions of the AsylG in the current version, including those standards to which the AsylG refers, are to be applied.
In accordance with Section 6 of the Federal Administrative Court Act - BVwGG, Federal Law Gazette I No. 10/2013 in the current version, the BVwG decides by single judges, unless the decision by senates is provided for in federal or state laws. This means that the individual judge has jurisdiction.
In accordance with Section 7, Paragraph 1, Item 1 of the BFA-Procedure Act (BFA-VG), Federal Law Gazette I No. 87/2012 in the current version, the BVwG decides on complaints against decisions (notices) of the BFA.
According to § 27 VwGVG, the administrative court, insofar as it is not unlawful due to the lack of competence of the authority, has the contested decision, the contested exercise of direct administrative authority and coercive power and the contested instruction on the basis of the complaint (§ 9 para. 1 nos ) or on the basis of the declaration of the scope of the contestation (Section 9 (3)).
According to Section 28 (1) VwGVG, the administrative court has to deal with the case by means of knowledge, provided the complaint is not to be rejected or the proceedings are to be discontinued.
According to § 28 Abs. 2 VwGVG the administrative court has to decide on complaints according to Art. 130 Abs. 1 Z 1 B-VG in the matter itself, if
1. the relevant facts are established or
2. the determination of the relevant facts by the administrative court itself is in the interest of speed or is associated with considerable cost savings.
Pursuant to Section 15 AsylG, the asylum seeker has to participate in the procedure under this federal law and, in particular, to justify his application without undue delay and to truthfully present all the information necessary to justify the application for international protection.
Pursuant to Section 18 AsylG, the authority has ex officio at all stages of the procedure to ensure that the information relevant to the decision is provided or incomplete information on the circumstances asserted to justify the application is completed, the means of certification for the information or the means of certification offered supplemented and all information given that appear necessary to justify the application. If necessary, the means of certification must also be provided ex officio.
5.2. Legally it follows from this:
Regarding part A):
5.2.1. The relevant, admissible and timely complaint was submitted to the BFA on December 7th, 2016 and was received by the BVwG on December 15th, 2016. Since the relevant legal provisions do not provide for a Senate competence, the decision in the case at hand is incumbent on the single judge responsible according to the respectively applicable business division of the BVwG.
5.2.2. The BVwG also states that the main points of the administrative procedure were lawfully carried out.
The BF was given an adequate hearing, in particular through the initial interview and the hearing - each with the help of suitable interpreters.
The authority in question questioned the BF in particular about the dangerous situation he claimed in India and based its decision on extensive reports from uncritical bodies on the situation in India, even though the country information sheet that was apparently used was neither named with the name nor with the creation date and many irrelevant ones in the decision Text parts are included.
With regard to any content unlawfulness or unlawfulness as a result of a breach of procedural regulations, it must be stated that in the proceedings before the BFA there are no indications that the authority concerned would have made an arbitrary or unlawful decision. Rather, the BF was given sufficient opportunities to present his escape allegations, if necessary to supplement or to remove any ambiguities or contradictions and to present any evidence. The decisive considerations, from which the authority concerned was guided in its justification, are set out in the contested decision in a comprehensive and clear manner. From the point of view of the BVwG, there are no indications for the deficiency of the procedure claimed in the complaint. Rather, the principles of official access, free assessment of evidence and research into the material truth, as well as, essentially, the hearing of the parties, as set out in Section 18 of the Asylum Act in conjunction with Section 39 (2) and Section 45 (2) of the AVG, were complied with.
5.2.3. To the complaint:
The submission in the complaint was also unsuitable to support the BF's submission. It is exhausted in the short repetition of his unbelievable as well as non-asylum-relevant escape allegation, which the BF had already brought before the first authority.
In the complaint, too, the BF did not provide any evidence of his identity or his allegations that he had escaped.
The reasons why an extension of the period for voluntary departure was requested was not set out in the complaint.
Why the granting of suspensive effect was requested with regard to the non-enforceable decision does not appear to be comprehensible.
5.2.4. Regarding the ruling points of the contested decision:
188.8.131.52. On § 3 AsylG (ruling point I. of the contested decision):
184.108.40.206.1. According to Section 3 AsylG, an alien who has submitted an application for international protection in Austria is granted the status of person entitled to asylum, provided that this application cannot be rejected because of the security of a third country or the jurisdiction of another country and it is credible that he is being persecuted in the country of origin within the meaning of Art. 1 Section AZ 2 of the Convention on the Legal Status of Refugees, Federal Law Gazette No. 55/1955, in the version of the Protocol on the Legal Status of Refugees, Federal Law Gazette No. 78/1974 (GFK) threatens (see also the definition of persecution in § 2 para. 1 no. 11 AsylG, which is based on Art. 9 of the Status Directive (Directive 2011/95 / EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13.12.2011 on standards for the recognition of third-country nationals or stateless persons as persons entitled to international protection , for a uniform status for refugees or for persons with the right to subsidiary protection and for the content of the protection to be granted; Neufa ssung) refers.
According to Section 3 (3) AsylG, the asylum application must be rejected with regard to the granting of the status of the person entitled to asylum if the foreigner has an option to flee within the country (Section 11 AsylG) or if he has set a reason for exclusion from asylum (Section 6 AsylG).
Paragraphs 4 to 4b of § 3 AsylG, which came into force on 01.01.2016 and which apply to asylum applications made after 15.11.2015 according to § 75, paragraph 24, are as follows:
"(4) An alien who is granted the status of asylum seeker is granted a temporary residence permit as a person entitled to asylum. The residence permit is valid for three years and is extended by an unlimited period of validity, provided that the conditions for initiating a procedure to withdraw the status of the person entitled to asylum are met The right of residence shall continue to apply until the person entitled to asylum has been revoked. The right of residence shall expire once the person entitled to asylum has been revoked.
(4a) As part of the state documentation (Section 5 BFA-G), the Federal Office must prepare an analysis at least once a calendar year to what extent it has been granted asylum status in those countries of origin that have been granted in the last five calendar years is of particular importance, there has been an essential, permanent change in the specific, particularly political, circumstances that are decisive for the fear of persecution.
(4b) In family proceedings in accordance with Section 34, Paragraph 1, Item 1, Paragraph 4 applies with the proviso that the period of validity of the temporary residence permit is based on the period of validity of the residence permit of the family member from whom the right is derived. "
Refugees within the meaning of Art. 1 Section AZ 2 of the GFK are those who are “outside their home country and not because of a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a certain social group or political convictions is able or unwilling to avail himself of the protection of this country in view of this fear; or who is stateless, is located outside the country of his habitual residence and is unable or unwilling in view of this fear to enter to return to this country. "
The central aspect of this concept of refugee in the GRC is the well-founded fear of persecution. A fear can only be well-founded if it is objectively understandable in the light of the asylum seeker's special situation and taking into account the circumstances in the persecuting state (see e.g. VwGH 22.12.1999, 99/01/0334; VwGH 21.12.2000, 2000/01 / 0131; VwGH January 25, 2001, 2001/20/0011; VwGH May 28, 2009, 2008/19/1031). It does not matter whether a certain person is actually afraid in a specific situation, but whether a person gifted with reason would be afraid in this situation (for reasons of convention).
- Do you believe in life
- What are free vectors
- Where can I get branded shoes from wholesalers
- What is the best music streaming service
- What is molecular structure
- Why are jet airways in losses
- Why does NASA send people to Mars
- Why we study a country's economy
- How do Mexicans feel about illegal immigrants?
- What are some mind-boggling percentages
- What is a good lifestyle diet
- What impresses you every day
- What is the symbol of the dollar
- How was ISC English Literature 2017
- Colleges will accept a 3 0 GPA
- What is the best looking hunting rifle
- We live in a selfish society
- What is the Home Buying Process
- Which MLB jugs were switch hitters
- What are Liver Cancer Symptoms
- Why does fat shaming not work
- What are some examples of socialist economies
- Is Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur really innocent
- Prevents Cigarette Smoking Cancer