Austria's First Deportation of a Syrian Asylum Seeker Sets Alarming Precedent

On July 7, 2025, Austria became the first EU country to deport a Syrian national to Syria since the start of the country’s conflict in 2011. The man, whose identity has not been made public, had his refugee status revoked following a criminal conviction in 2018, after which he was subsequently ordered deported. Alarmingly, Austria’s government promised that additional deportations to Syria would soon follow, and it quickly made plans to deport a second Syrian individual.

The deportation of the first national to Syria was in line with a decision issued by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The ECtHR initially halted the deportation but then discontinued this decision as it found a lack of risk upon return to Syria. Austria’s second planned deportation, however, was paused by another decision issued by the ECtHR. According to dpa Germany, the court issued an interim injunction inquiring whether the Austrian government had adequately assessed the risks of torture and death upon return to Syria, referring to the deportation of the first Syrian national whose whereabouts remain unknown.

Austria's deportation of the first Syrian national and the ECtHR’s initial ruling raise significant concerns: it remains unclear as to how the government and the court assessed whether a risk upon return existed. Moreover, the consistently changing conditions in Syria call into question the durability and accuracy of the information relied on. Despite these pressing concerns, other EU Member States have already expressed their intentions to follow Austria’s lead. For example, Germany’s Interior Ministry announced plans to begin deporting Syrians with criminal convictions to Syria. However, these stated intentions contradict ongoing documentation in Syria, which increasingly demonstrates that Syria remains unsafe for return.

Facts of the Case

The first Syrian man deported in July was granted asylum by Austria in 2014, but his refugee status was revoked five years later after he was convicted of an unspecified crime and sentenced to seven years in prison. Although the Austrian authorities did not release specific details about his crime, the man served his sentence. Prior to his release, he filed another application for international protection, which was declared inadmissible based on a report issued by the European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA). While the ECtHR barred the deportation at first, it subsequently discontinued the interim measure after it held that the security situation in Syria would not pose a risk to the man upon his return.

Following the legal controversy in early June, the man's first scheduled deportation was delayed due to concerns about the flight path to Syria as it crossed through Iranian airspace. The second attempt to Syria, however, was ultimately successful, marking Austria’s first deportation to Syria in approximately 15 years and the EU’s first deportation back to Syria since the beginning of the conflict. Since the man’s deportation, his family and legal team have not been able to make contact with him and fear for his safety.

In light of the lack of information as to his whereabouts and according to a letter obtained by Reuters, the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances launched an inquiry on August 8 into the fate of the man. The Committee asked Austria to “make formal diplomatic representations to the Syrian authorities to determine whether [he] is alive, where he is being held, in what conditions, and request diplomatic guarantees to ensure his safety and humane treatment,” Reuters reported. As of the date of publication of this article, it remains unclear whether Austria has responded to the Committee’s inquiry. 

Austria’s Issues Negative Asylum Decision Based on Unreliable Country of Origin Information

In a press release issued by the Austrian Federal Agency for Immigration and Asylum, the agency stated that it relied on a country-of-origin information report issued by the EUAA, presumably the report released in March 2025 as it was the most recent publication before the first deportation to Syria was ordered. In its report, the EUAA stated, “Information on the treatment of returnees from abroad could not be found within the time constraints of this report,” raising further questions as to how Austria determined that returnees would not be subjected to risks that would prevent deportation.

Throughout the report, the EUAA further provided information on ongoing rights violations civilians faced in Syria, including killings and kidnappings, indicating that returnees at that time may have been exposed to a serious risk of inhuman or degrading treatment or serious harm to life. Throughout early 2025, SJAC also reported on the violations targeting Alawite civilians, former regime affiliates, in addition to analyzing the violence that erupted on the coast, further raising concerns as to the fate that awaits returnees in Syria.

Recently, reports have emerged regarding the government’s mistreatment of returnees, which SJAC documenters are working to verify. The Syrian government and investigative mechanisms must investigate these cases and determine if additional cases of mistreatment have occurred to accurately assess the risks returnees are facing. Without such efforts and proper assessments, Syrians will continue to be prematurely returned and potentially at risk of inhuman and degrading treatment or serious harm to life. To accurately assess the risk level to returnees, more time is needed to investigate whether such cases of mistreatment have occurred. SJAC has also been made aware of cases of arbitrary detention, enforced disappearances, and torture ongoing in government-controlled facilities.

Simultaneously, violence has continued to rock Syria, as demonstrated by the events in Suwayda and the coast. With this information in mind, SJAC reiterates its previous position: conditions in Syria are rapidly changing and unstable, meaning assessments of conditions are premature and unreliable over time. As such, contrary to its ultimate decision in the first deportation case, the latest ECtHR’s halting of a deportation pending a risk assessment from Austria is timely and necessary, and such risk assessments must be conducted continuously.

Austria’s Deportation Undermines Legal Protections for Refugees

Austria’s decision to deport the man to Syria raises additional legal concerns. In addition to the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), the 1951 Geneva Convention and EU primary and secondary law bind EU Member States. Under the 1951 Convention, to which Austria and all EU member states are a party, the principle of non-refoulement prohibits countries from returning any person to a country where they may face threats to life or freedom. Article 21 of the Qualification Directive then incorporates the principle of non-refoulement into EU law.

While both the Convention and the EU Qualification Directive allow for refoulement in cases where individuals are convicted of particularly serious crimes and pose a danger to public security, these rules are exceptions and cannot systematically applied to individuals with criminal convictions. In July 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) outlined that revocation of status is a measure of last resort—one that must be balanced with a proportionality test that weighs whether the revocation of status is proportionate to the threat the individual faces to society.

Already in a 2019 judgment, the CJEU found that even when refugee status is revoked due to a criminal conviction, EU member states cannot deport individuals if doing so would expose them to a serious risk of being subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, prohibited through the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (EU Charter). The CJEU held: “Member States may not remove, expel or extradite a foreign national where there are substantial grounds for believing that he will face a genuine risk, in the country of destination, of being subjected to treatment prohibited by Article 4 and Article 19(2) of the Charter.”

Currently, it is questionable whether domestic authorities and courts across the EU and the ECtHR can accurately assess the threat level Syrians face upon return without precise and durable country-of-origin information. The risk assessment under Article 3 of the ECHR, “must be individualised and based on all available evidence.” The availability of reliable and verifiable evidence, however, continues to pose a challenge to documenters, human rights organizations, and UN bodies. Given that authorities and courts also rely on these sources, the conclusion that a risk cannot be established is cause for concern.

Conclusion

Austria's premature deportation sets a dangerous precedent and has the potential to undermine protections outlined in EU human rights law. While deportations of Syrians thus far appear to be limited to those with criminal convictions, concerns remain that wide scale returns to Syria will begin before the security and humanitarian situation has sufficiently and reliably stabilized. To safeguard the rights of individuals and uphold EU human rights law, states should refrain from deporting individuals back to Syria, regardless of their criminal history, as it remains unclear whether returnees will be at risk of inhuman and degrading treatment or serious harm to life.

If states resume risk assessments prior to the situation in Syria stabilizing, such assessments must be made frequently to ensure that decisions to deport individuals are not based on outdated information. Lastly, governments should also be transparent with their conclusions on the conditions in Syria, which includes country of origin information, risk assessments, and assurances received from the Syrian government, publicly sharing such information. Until these conditions are met, deportations to Syria will continue to risk exposing individuals to serious harm and undermining due process.

___________________________

For more information or to provide feedback, please contact SJAC at [email protected] and follow us on Facebook and Twitter. Subscribe to SJAC’s newsletter for updates on our work