4.4. Managing caseloads and assessing applications for international protection

4.4. Managing caseloads and assessing applications for international protection

Several countries updated policies based on changes in the countries of origin in order to support good quality and rapid decision-making.222 Nonetheless, the volatile situation in several countries of origin impacted case processing, with several authorities suspending the processing of cases by nationals from certain countries of origin. These decisions often had a significant impact on caseloads, pending cases and recognition rates.

An example was the responses triggered by developments in Syria in December 2024, when most EU+ countries suspended decision-making on the protection needs of Syrian applicants until there was more clarity on the situation in the country.223 Asylum authorities re-started processing of these cases at different times throughout 2025 (see Table 2). At the end of 2025, Syrians were the main nationality in the caseload of 12 EU+ countries. This nationality accounted for one-half or more of all pending cases in Austria, Cyprus, Germany and Norway.

Table 2. Resumption of assessments of applications submitted by nationals of Syria, 2025

Table 3. Examples of the temporary suspension of decision-making on protection needs of applicants with certain profiles, 2025

In these circumstances, the need for up-to-date, objective and balanced information on countries of origin was even more accentuated, putting at the forefront the work of COI units (see Table 4). Asylos warned that changes in the form and content of the US State Department annual reports risk undermining fair and evidence-based asylum decisions in EU countries.234 In Belgium, the coalition agreement stated that the CGRS’ COI unit (CEDOCA) will be given an additional mandate to investigate the rule of law and detention conditions in other countries in order to assess the feasibility of building or leasing prisons where convicted detainees in irregular stay can serve their sentences. These agreements could only be implemented if the detention is carried out in a proper and humane manner, respecting international legal obligations and would require judicial approval by the Council of State and advice from CEDOCA.235 In 2025, CEDOCA prepared nine papers for the Minister for Asylum and Migration related to this matter.

Digitalisation and the establishment of integrated case management systems remained a crucial objective for asylum authorities in strengthening capacity and preparing for compliance with some of the stricter timelines under the Pact (see Table 5). Academia warned about the risk for marginalisation of other perspectives in the process of increased technological use.236

Table 4. Fact-finding missions for country of origin information, 2025

Table 5. Examples of digitalisation initiatives in EU+ countries, 2025

In 2025, EU+ countries issued almost 874,000 first instance decisions, which is the most since 2017. The increase was driven by a sharp climb in the number of rejections, mainly for citizens of countries with a low recognitions rate (20% or lower). The most decisions were issued in Germany, followed by France and Spain. France, Ireland and Italy issued the most decisions on record. Several countries issued less decisions, mainly due to fewer decisions issued to Syrians. The largest declines in decision-making were seen in Austria, Greece and the Netherlands.

Pending cases at first instance decreased to 863,000 in 2025, from 986,000 in 2024 (approximately 13% decrease) (see Figure 5). While some EU+ countries ramped up first instance decision-making, the decline in pending cases was rather the result of fewer applications being lodged. The caseload shrank in 15 countries. In Germany, pending cases at first instance halved by the end of 2025 from a year earlier (102,000). Bulgaria recorded the largest relative decline. The number of pending cases declined to an unprecedented low in Sweden.

However in Italy, despite the record level of decision-making, the number of pending cases increased, becoming the country with the most pending cases across the EU+. The caseload remained high in Spain as well. Most pending cases in the EU+ pertained to Venezuelans (120,000, almost all in Spain), Syrians (100,000, nearly one-half in Germany) and Colombians (70,000, mostly in Spain). At the end of 2025, the caseload related to applicants from countries with a low recognition rate reached 63% of the total pending caseload.

Despite the drop in pending cases at first instance, more appeals overall implied a stable and high caseload at all instances.

Figure 5. Annual asylum applications, first instance case closures and year-end pending caseloads at first instance and all instances in EU+ countries, 2020-2025

Figure 6. Disparity between asylum applications and case closures (first instance decisions, discontinuations after withdrawals and otherwise closed cases) in EU+ countries with the largest gaps, 2025