Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 41kWORD 19k
20 March 2019
Question for written answer E-001427-19
to the Commission
Rule 130
Sofia Sakorafa (GUE/NGL)

 Subject:  EASO has concealed a report it drew up on the conditions prevailing in Turkey in 2016 in order for that country to be recognised as an allegedly safe third country for refugees
 Answer in writing 

As has now been revealed(1), in 2016 EASO concealed its report on conditions for applicants for international protection in Turkey. This information has fuelled plausible suspicions that there was a deliberate cover-up to allow Turkey to be recognised as a so-called ‘safe third country’ for refugees.

According to the revelations, the report was deliberately ‘pulled’, since it was judged that its findings were contrary to and might have prevented the implementation of the EU-Turkey Statement on refugees.

Given that:
this report would have been in direct contradiction with the Commission's publicly reiterated position that Turkey is a safe third country,
a decisive factor in the plenary decisions by the Greek Council of State recognising Turkey as a safe country(2) was a letter from the European Commissioner for Migration to the Greek Deputy Minister for Immigration Policy, stating that the Commission continued to believe that Turkey provided adequate protection or protection in line with the Geneva Convention and that it had no evidence to the contrary,
will the Commission say:
1. Was it aware of the existence of this report? Does it know why the report was concealed?
2. How credible is the EASO now and what steps does it consider are needed for it to be rehabilitated?
3. Is it examining the possibility of an investigation being held into the reasons for the concealment of the EASO report on Turkey and into the identity of those who gave the instructions for the report to be pulled?

(2)Decisions 2347/2017 and 2348/2017 of the Council of State.

Original language of question: EL 
Last updated: 4 April 2019Legal notice