Home Asylum Report Publications analysing developments in asylum Sign In

Who is Who in International Protection in the EU+: Countries Applying the Concept of Safe Countries in the Asylum Procedure
​In the context of asylum, the term ‘safe country’ refers to countries which generally do not generate protection needs for their people or countries in which asylum seekers are protected and are not in danger.
EU law provides four safe country concepts which can be applied in the asylum procedure. They are regulated in the recast Asylum Procedures Directive:
  • safe country of origin
  • safe third country
  • first country of asylum
  • European safe third country.
For countries not bound by the recast APD – namely Denmark,[1] Iceland, Ireland,[2] Norway and Switzerland[3] – a similar national legal framework applies. References to these countries should be read in relation to the applicable national legal framework. 

​The data visualisations present the countries which implement the concepts of a safe country of origin, a safe third country and a European safe third country in order to process an asylum application accordingly.​

Overview of countries applying the concept of safe countries      

Hover over a country and “click more" to view relevant information about the implementation of safe country concept in each country. 

Overview of countries applying the concept of safe third countries

Use the tabs at the top of the visualisation to navigate to the next and previous data. Hover over a country and “click more" to view countries which have adopted a list of designated safe countries.​​

Download: Safe country concept matrix​​ ​(dataset)

​​

Current state of play

​Safe country of origin

  • 23 EU+ countries have adopted a national list of safe countries of origin. The Netherlands has temporarily suspended the application of its national list pending the introduction of an EU list under the Pact.
  • Finland is the only country which implements the safe country of origin concept on a case-by-case basis.
  • Lithuania, Portugal and Romania do not implement the concept as a national list has not been adopted.
  • Latvia and Spain do not implement the concept as relevant legal provisions on the designation of a list do not exist.
  • Poland does not define the safe country of origin concept in law.
  • Only 8 countries are recognised as safe by more than 14 EU+ countries which implement a national list. These include Albania (by 21 countries), Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia (20 countries each), Kosovo (19 countries), Georgia (17 countries) and Ghana (14 countries).
  • A majority of countries of origin (35 countries) are listed as safe by 3 or less EU+ countries which implement a national list.
  • 7 EU+ countries which implement a national list (Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway and Switzerland) also apply exceptions for specific geographical areas or profiles of asylum seekers within a country of origin (see details in map).

Safe third country

  • The safe third country concept is not applied uniformly in all EU+ countries.
  • The safe third country concept is included in national legislation in all EU+ countries, except France, Iceland, Italy and Poland.
  • Only six EU+ countries have adopted a national list of safe third countries (Bulgaria, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Hungary and Switzerland).
  • When the national legal framework refers to the safe third country concept but a national list has not been adopted, the concept is applied on a case-by-case basis in 14 EU+ countries (Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden).
  • Czechia, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain refer to the concept in national law but do not apply it in practice.
  • Estonia and Hungary are the only countries which apply exceptions to the application of the safe third country concept based on geographical location and certain profiles of applicants (see details in map). The exceptions applied by both countries are identical to those applied to the application of the safe country of origin concept.​


References
​

[1] Pursuant to Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Denmark is not bound by the recast APD nor by the 2005 Directive.

[2] Pursuant to Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice, annexed to the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the TFEU, and without prejudice to Article 4 of that Protocol, Ireland is not taking part in the adoption of the recast APD and is not bound by it or subject to its application. Ireland had previously transposed Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status. 

[3] Pursuant to EUAA Regulation​ 2021/2303, the Agency should be open to participation by countries which have concluded agreements with the Union by virtue of which they have adopted and apply EU law in the field covered by this Regulation, in particular Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland. Consequently, and having regard to the fact that Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland participate in the activities of EASO on the basis of arrangements concluded by those countries with the EU concerning their participation in EASO, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland should be able to participate in the activities of the Agency and contribute to the practical cooperation between Member States and the Agency in accordance with the terms and conditions established by existing or new arrangements. In this context, analysis by the EUAA includes Iceland, Norway and Switzerland.
© European Union Agency for Asylum
Policy Notices  |  Information and Analysis on Developments in Asylum  |  Contact