The Spanish Embassy in Pakistan is forgetting about the Afghan prosecutors who have managed to leave their country on the other side of the border to try to obtain a visa and be able to reach Spain. These women, some with children, are at risk of being arrested by the Taliban government if they do not manage to get out of there. Given the administrative silence of the ambassador, the National Court has ordered that he prepare the documentation so that in the specific case of a prosecutor and her daughter they can reach Spain.
This has been agreed by the contentious-administrative Chamber of the National Court, which considers that this specific prosecutor, specialized in anti-terrorist matters before the Taliban Government arrived, has participated in “relevant” processes regarding international terrorism.
This prosecutor has managed to get the Spanish courts to agree with her regarding the "administrative silence on the part of the Spanish ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in the framework of a procedure for requesting international protection."
This woman has been able to make this claim because she is a non-national of the country where the diplomatic representation is located and her physical integrity is at risk.
The Chamber explains that, as established by the Supreme Court, the assessment of the precautionary measure must primarily address the appearance of a risk of persecution for any of the reasons that justify the granting of asylum. This must be assessed based on the objective conditions of the country of origin and also based on the personal circumstances of the asylum seeker, without forgetting that there is also a public interest in ensuring that the institution of asylum is not denatured.
In this specific case, the Court affirms, the woman has justified that as a professional prosecutor she has intervened in relevant processes regarding international terrorism and that, as a consequence of the political situation in Afghanistan, she has fled the country to Pakistan "out of fear." of being retaliated against for her professional work.
Furthermore, the order adds that the Public Prosecutor's Office that has appeared in the proceedings has provided a police report in which "the seriousness and plausibility of the fear" expressed by the plaintiff and the "real and effective risk" that she could be deported to Afghanistan with the consequent update of the life risk that this would entail for her and her son.
The court indicates that the UNHCR guidance note on the international protection needs of people fleeing Afghanistan, dated February 2022, is decisive for the resolution of this issue.
In this document, prepared on the basis of available reports on widespread human rights violations in that country, UNHCR continues to call on all countries to allow civilians fleeing Afghanistan to enter their territories and to guarantee the right to request asylum and ensure respect for the principle of non-refoulement at all times. Furthermore, it calls on States to register all arrivals of people seeking international protection and to issue documentary proof of the registration of all those affected.
The Court recalls, in response to the allegations of the State lawyer, that the aforementioned guidance note also makes a specific provision for family reunification, so that UNHCR continues to urge States to facilitate and expedite family reunification procedures. , in that it recognizes that it is the only way to ensure that the right to family life and unity of refugees is respected.
