Legal Documents in Dutch Asylum Request Slobodan Mitric
TRANSLATION FROM THE DUTCH
DUTCH MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Directorate: Movement of Persons, Migration & Alien Affairs Dept. (DPV)
Department: Asylum and Migration Affairs Division (DPV/AM)
Postbox 20061, 2500 EB The Hague
Telephone: 070-348 5964
Fax: 070-348 5046
Court in The Hague
Subsidiary Courtroom Amsterdam, Alien Room
Attn. Mrs. Mr M.L. van Leer
Post Office Box 75399
1070 AJ Amsterdam
Date: December 19, 2007
Attachments: 2 & Sealed Envelope
Concerns: Appeal by Slobodan MITRIC
Born on March 1, 1948 of Serbian-Montenegrin Nationality
Justice Nr. 9903.30.2121
Procedure Nr. AWB 07/00255
Dear Mrs. Van Leer,
In your letter of December 7, 2007 you asked for the documents on which de individual official message of December 10, 2003 was based. Hereby the enclosed documents. I also send you the underlying documents related to the official messages released earlier in this case on 22 December 1999 and November 17, 2003:
1. A memorandum of February 26, 1999 from the Department of Asylum and Migration Affairs (DPC/AM) to Her Majesty’s Embassy in Belgrade.
2. Two telephone notes of respectively September 29, 1999 and October 11, 1999.
3. A memorandum of September 29, 1999 from H.M Embassy in Belgrade to the Department of Asylum and Migration Affairs (DPC/AM).
4. A memorandum of October 18, 1999 from the Department of Asylum and Migration Afairs (DPC/AM) to H.M. Embassy in Belgrade.
5. A memorandum of November 9, 1999 from H.M. Embassy in Belgrade to the Department of Asylum and Migration Affairs (DPC/AM0 with as attachment a report by the agent.
6. A telephone note of October 3, 2003.
7. An email exchange between the Department of Asylum and Migration Affairs (DPV/AM) and H.M. Embassy in Belgrade dated November 4 and 6, 2003.
8. An email exchange between the Department of Asylum and Migration Affairs (DPV/AM) and H.M. Embassy in Belgrade dated November 21 and 28, 2003.
For the documents mentioned from numbers 1 to 8, I base myself on paragraph 8:29 article 1 of the law on public administration (Algemene wet bestuursrecht). There are in my opinion important reasons which justify restricting the cognizance of certain parts in the above-mentioned documents to your Court. These reasons relate to the protection of the sources that were consulted and to the research methods and procedures that were used.
The Necessary Protection of the Consulted Sources and the Research Methods and Procedures Used
In the research motivated by a request for asylum, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs engages agents in order to carry out this research. During this research several informants are consulted.
In the underlying documents of individual official notices the names and functions of the agents and informers will remain confidential with an appeal on source-protection.
Agents and informers can run a great risk if it becomes known that have collaborated in a request for asylum, either from the side of the authorities, or from the side of the alien or his or her family members or acquaintances. In order not to endanger the security of agents and informants, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs promises them to keep their identity and information confidential. This promise can never be broken unilaterally. The Ministry is after responsible for maintaining this confidentiality.
If the identity of an agent or informant can be deduced from the research method or procedure used, the Ministry will make an appeal on confidentiality. It is, for example, in some cases fairly simple to trace whether someone has verified information at a certain department and who this person is.
The greater the security-risk for an agent or informant in a country, the sooner an appeal will be made on confidentiality in order to protect the sources. In some countries the bad security situation is even a reason for deciding not to put the identity and expertise of the engaged agents down on paper in each individual research report. In that case, the findings of the agents are mentioned on special paper without any distinguishing features. The strictly confidential information about the confidante is in any case known to this Ministry.
In some cases, it is necessary to make an appeal on the protection of the research methods and procedures. In order to asses if a document is genuine, a number of features of a document are assessed. When these features become known to forgers, this can lead to better forgeries.
Sometimes a research report contains information that can be used for fabricating false escape stories. Moreover, based on this information a picture can be formed to deduce in how far escape stories are controllable. This information can therefore be misused, whereby future research will no longer be possible or even senseless.
Protecting the research methods and procedures should therefore weigh heavier than the interests of the claimant.
The Public Administration Law in any case provides for the possibility to supply documents to the judge (par. 8:29, art. 1 Awb). This compensates the disadvantages in procedural law that not all documents are fully disclosed to the asylum seeker.
Besides my general motivation, I will also motivate the appeal on par. 8:29, art. 1 Awb in detail according to the procedure of the National Staff Bureau Alien Affairs (see the letter of September 15, 1999). Herewith, I act upon the decisions by the Rechtseenheidskamer in The Hague on February 10, 1999.
For a number of passages in the underlying documents, an appeal is made on confidentiality based on par. 8:29 Awb. Depending on the nature of the motivation, these passages are marked with a number.
For the passages marked with the number “1”, an appeal on the protection of sources has been made. The numbering of the case and the data of the persons involved with the research will not be made public. Furthermore, for explaining the appeal on par. 8:29, art. 1 Awb, a reference is made to the general motivation, because I consider this for this specific case to be sufficient.
The passages marked with the number “2” contain internal information that is neither related to the request for asylum by the person involved, nor relevant for the result of the research. I therefore wish to keep these documents confidential with a general appeal on par. 8:29 Awb.
Due to the appeal on the protection of sources, methods and procedures, I request that you treat the original documents confidentially, not to make a photocopy and not to quote them, and after use to return them (with the listing “CONFIDENTIAL” on the envelope) to the following address:
Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Post Office Box 20061
2500 EB The Hague
In case you have questions concerning the above-mentioned documents or wish an explanation or further motivation, please contact me at the Asylum and Migration Affairs Division (DPV/AM) (tel. 070-348 5964; fax: 070-348 5046).
In case you do not consider my requested restriction regarding the cognizance in your intermediary decision to be (completely) justified, I request you urgently to send your reaction not only to the defendant, but also to the above-mentioned address. This with a view to the interests named in this letter, which I have to serve.
I have already sent these documents, in a masked form to the extent that confidentiality is necessary, as well as this public letter of motivation to the attorney of the claimant and the defendant.
I would appreciate in due time to receive a copy of the decision.
On behalf of The Minister of Foreign Affairs,
Head of the Asylum and Migration Affairs Division,
(Is signed) Jaap van der Zeeuw