EMBARGOED UNTIL MONDAY, 20 June 2011 0001 GMT ... - UNHCR

Fig. 11 Main destination countries for newasylum-seekers | 2009-2010220200180160140120100806040200(x1,000)up by 13 per cent in 2010. PrimarilyChinese and Mexican asylum-seekersaccounted for this recent increase, afterseveral years of stable numbers. Francewas the third largest recipient during2010 (48,100 claims), recording a 14 percent increase compared to 2009 (42,100claims) and the third consecutive rise.The increase in 2010 was partly attributedto a higher number of asylumseekersfrom Georgia (+188%), Bangladesh(+118%), and Haiti (+38%). Germanywas fourth most important destinationTABLE 3New asylum claimslodged in 2010 intop 10 UNHCR offices*Malaysia 25,600Kenya 19,300Turkey 9,200India 4,000Indonesia 3,900Yemen 3,700Cameroon 3,300Syrian Arab Republic 3,200Jordan 2,900Egypt 2,600* Excludes appeal/review claims.20092010South United France Germany Sweden Ecuador Malaysia Canada United BelgiumAfrica States Kingdomcountry for new asylum-seekers in 2010with more than 41,300 asylum claimsregistered. This is a 49 per cent increasecompared to 2009 (27,000 claims) andthe highest value since 2003. The increasein 2010 was partly attributed toa higher number of asylum-seekersfrom Serbia (and Kosovo: UNSCR 1244)and The former Yugoslav Republic ofMacedonia, many of Roma origin. Thismay be the result of the European Unionhaving waived visa requirementsfor both countries at the beginning of2010. Sweden ranked fifth with 31,800applications received during the year.This constituted a 32 per cent increasecompared to 2009 and the third highestfigure in 15 years. Other important destinationcountries for asylum-seekerswere Ecuador (31,400), Malaysia (25,600),and Canada (22,500) (31) .In 2010, UNHCR offices received89,500 new applications for refugee statusand 7,300 on appeal or for review.For the third year running, the office inMalaysia received the largest numberof new requests (25,600). Kenya wasthe second largest operation in 2010(19,300 new claims), followed by Turkey(9,200), India (4,000), and Indonesia(3,900). UNHCR offices in Kenya, Turkey,Indonesia, Yemen and Cameroonwere confronted with an increase in applicationswhile operations in Malaysia,India, and the Libyan Arab Jamahiriyaexperienced a decrease. Altogether, thetop 5 UNHCR offices receiving asylumapplications registered about 70 per centof all new claims in 2010. Moreover, 90per cent of UNHCR’s refugee statusdetermination work (in terms of applicationsreceived) was concentrated in 11countries.by nationalityIn UNHCR and state asylum procedurescombined, the highest number of newasylum claims was filed by individualsoriginating from Zimbabwe (149,400),Somalia (37,500), the Democratic Republicof the Congo (35,600), Afghanistan(33,500), Colombia (32,300), Serbia(and Kosovo: UNSCR 1244) (30,500),and Myanmar (27,900) [see Map 4 below].These figures, however, hide patternsof certain nationalities tending to clusterin a limited number of countries.For instance, 9 out of 10 Zimbabweanasylum claims were lodged in SouthAfrica alone. Two-thirds of all newasylum claims lodged by nationals ofSerbia (and Kosovo: UNSCR 1244) weresubmitted in Sweden (7,900) and Germany(6,600), while more than half ofall Somali requests were submitted inSouth Africa (6,000), Sweden (5,600),Uganda (5,200), and Ethiopia (4,200).Even though asylum-seekers from Colombiasought protection in more than40 countries, 8 out of 10 requested refugeestatus in Ecuador.DecisionsProvisional figures indicate that some578,900 decisions on individual asylumapplications were rendered during 2010.UNHCR staff adjudicated 61,100, or 11per cent of the total – a similar relativeshare like in 2009. In 10 countries, some5,200 substantive decisions were taken31 Source: Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) Canada.32 Also labeled as “non-substantive” decisions which might result from, among others, the death of the applicant, no-showfor interview, withdrawal of the application, abandonment of the claim, or the determination that another country wasresponsible for the claim (‘Dublin II’ procedure).33 This figure is likely to be substantially higher but a significant number of decisions rendered by States at the appeal orreview stage of the asylum procedure has not yet been released.26 UNHCR Global Trends 2010