The applicant, a stateless person Bidoon (Bedoon) born in Kuwait request international protection in Greece on 20 August 2024. He claimed to have left his country of previous habitual residence on grounds that he had no rights and no access to health, education and document because is a Bidoon.  the applicant stated that he is a Shiite Muslim, illiterate, married and the father of two children. His wife and two children still live in Kuwait. The applicant lacked documents, did not attend school and did not have a profession. Although he was aware of the Bidoon Committee, he did not acquire legal documents and was not aware of any family member to have obtained such documents. He also stated that neither he nor his children were accepted to attend school because they did not have documents. The applicant detailed that Bidoon are discriminated against by Kuwait people and the authorities, that he took part in demonstrations in 2019. He was forced to hide because he attracted negative attention of the authorities who allegedly looked for him every 3-4 days. His application was rejected by the Regional Asylum Office in Kos, and he further appealed before the Appeals Committee. The latter noted that according to UNHCR, there are approximately 93,566 stateless Bidoon in Kuwait, who are stateless Arabs. Most Bidoon are descended from nomadic tribes of the Arabian Peninsula and the causes of statelessness among them vary, with a third of them lacking registration since 1961. They were declared illegal residents by the government in 1986, and they had been deprived of rights. The committee noted that according to international sources, most Bidoon live in slum-like settlements on the outskirts of Kuwait City, Tayma, Sulaibiya area and Ahmadi, lacking adequate housing and protection from Kuwait's extreme weather conditions. In 2010-2011 the Bidoon held small demonstrations demanding citizenship, jobs and other rights available to Kuwaiti citizens. On personal circumstances the committee noted that despite clarifying questions about his daily life, the applicant gave general and simple answers, without providing detailed account of his personal experiences. His explanations for lack of access to education, healthcare or legal documents were found inconsistent and incomplete. The committee also concluded that the applicant could return to his country of habitual residence as it did not find any indication of a risk of indiscriminate violence or a risk of ill-treatment or serious harm. The appeal was rejected as unfounded, and he further appealed before the Athens Administrative Court of First Instance. The applicant claimed that there were some procedural shortcomings related to the fact that he was interviewed by an EUAA case officer, and he alleged an infringement of his right to be heard. The court dismissed these allegations by clarifying that the procedure was conducted in compliance with Article 82 (2) of the Law 4939/20202, the interview was conducted in Arabic, with an interpreter’s assistance and that he was guaranteed the right to expose his arguments about the reasons for having left Kuwait and unwillingness to return both at administrative level and before the Appeals Committee.

The court further noted that the applicant alleged that he did not benefit of special guarantees for vulnerable applicants in view of his medical condition since he suffered of diabetes mellitus, depression, anxiety and sleep disorders. The court reviewed he statements and documents presented to hold that the applicant was examined since entry in the reception facility in Kos and has received adequate medical care for his health problems and was found not to be in a vulnerable situation. Even when he was asked at the beginning of the interview if he has any other problem except diabetes, he replied in the negative and confirmed fitness to conduct the personal interview.

With regard to the argument that the contested decision lacked proper reasoning, the court noted that the negative decision lacked an adequate assessment on the applicant's allegations concerning the alleged persecution suffered by the Kuwaiti authorities due to his status as a stateless Bidoon, in the form of his and his family exclusion from free health care, education and the issuance of basic legal and certificate documents. Such exclusion from public services and benefits for stateless Bidoon, as well as the poor living conditions on the outskirts of Kuwait City, were corroborated with country-of-origin information from international reports. The court found credible the applicant’s statements about his residence in the Sulaibiya area, his and his family denial of access to education, his mother exclusion from access to hospital because she lacked documents since his account was deemed detailed and coherent. The court found that the commission did not justify its decision on why it considered that the applicant provided vague and general answers. Moreover, the court concluded that the international COI reports confirmed that the Kuwait authorities exclude stateless Bidoon persons from public services such as education, health and the issuance of documents and certificates. It ruled that the applicants presented facts and statements to demonstrate his personal experience of persecution as stateless Bidoon, that his allegations were presented in detail, clearly and in a coherent manner, thus having internal and external credibility.

The court annulled the contested decision and referred the case back to the administrative authority for a new and reasoned examination as well as further examination on the applicant’s allegations and on whether he meets the eligibility requirements for refugee status.