The mere fact that an asylum seeker has poor family relationships cannot constitute grounds for granting asylum

On May 22, 2025, the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic, by judgment Case No. 2Sak/3/2025, rejected the cassation appeal in the matter of the refusal to grant asylum to a foreigner who often changed the description of his fears of persecution, information about his countries of origin, and essentially saw the reason for granting asylum in his family’s refusal to accept him.

The Supreme Administrative Court dealt with the case of a foreigner who had repeatedly applied for asylum in the Slovak Republic and had not been granted asylum. The Panel mainly assessed whether the public administration authorities and the administrative court had properly examined the foreigner’s claims that he had a well-founded fear of persecution in his country of origin on grounds of race, nationality or religion, for holding certain political opinions or membership of a certain social group and, due to these fears, was unable or unwilling to return to that country.

The foreigner applied for asylum in several European countries between 2021 and 2024, presented different identities, different claims about different home countries, did not submit copies of his documents, although he had them, out of fear of persecution, first due to concerns about his ex-girlfriend’s family and then due to fears of persecution due to his homosexual orientation. He constantly provided new evidence, did not wait for the results of the asylum proceedings and repeatedly traveled abroad during the asylum procedure. In the asylum proceedings in the territory of the Slovak Republic, he also pointed out the fact that legislation punishing homosexual behavior has been enforced in his home country since 2011 and also pointed out the behavior of his cousin, who could blackmail him with an intimate video upon his return to his homeland.

The Supreme Administrative Court thoroughly examined the case of the foreigner and pointed out that it had not been proven in the asylum proceedings that the asylum seeker had been subject to state sanctions (due to his orientation or other reasons) during his life in the country of origin. He could have worked, studied and even left the country. The court also emphasized that the credibility of the concerns and reasons for granting asylum communicated by the foreigner was not enhanced by his behavior consisting in frequently changing the stated reasons for asylum, not providing cooperation and not waiting for the completion of asylum proceedings in individual countries.

In relation to the applicant’s family relations regarding his sexual orientation, the Court of Cassation emphasized that homosexual orientation may not actually be positively accepted in the family. However, the mere fact that the asylum seeker has bad relations within the family cannot constitute a reason for granting asylum.

The Supreme Administrative Court, after considering the case, dismissed the applicant’s cassation appeal. This judgment was adopted unanimously by the Supreme Administrative Court, and no appeal is admissible against it.

This was decided by the Panel No. 2 of the Supreme Administrative Court, composed of: President of the Panel Prof. JUDr. Juraj Vačok, PhD. and members of the Panel JUDr. Elena Berthotyová, PhD. and JUDr. Marián Trenčan.