EASO Practical Guide on Age Assessment: Second edition

European Asylum Support Oﬃ ce

SUPPORT IS OUR MISSION

EASO

Prac� cal Guide on

age assessment

Second edi� on

EASO Prac cal Guides Series

Neither EASO nor any person acting on its behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of

the information contained herein.

Print ISBN 978-92-9494-648-5 doi:10.2847/236187 BZ-01-17-965-EN-C

PDF ISBN 978-92-9494-647-8 doi:10.2847/292263 BZ-01-17-965-EN-N

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers

to your questions about the European Union.

Freephone number (*):

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you).

More information on the European Union is available on the internet (http://europa.eu).

European Asylum Support Oce

SUPPORT IS OUR MISSION

EASO

praccal guide on

age assessment

Second edion

EASO Praccal Guides Series

The EASO practical guide on age assessment publication builds upon the information and

guidance on the age assessment process and the overview of the age assessment methods

already analysed in the EASO age assessment practice in Europe (2013). It offers practical

guidance, key recommendations and tools on the implementation of the best interests of

the child when assessing the age of a person from a multidisciplinary and holistic approach.

It also brings up-to-date information on the methods conducted by EU+ states and on new

methods still not in use as possible or future alternatives.

EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 5

Abbreviaons ��7

Execuve summary

�� 11

ntroducon

��

�� 13

Chapter 1 Circumstances of age assessment �� 16

The age assessment from a fundamental rights perspecve

��18

hapter 2 The best interests of the

ild and procedural safeguards

��2

The best interests of the child

��2

Assessing the best interests of the child for the purpose of the age assessment

��21

pplying the principle of the benet of the doubt �� 22

Guardian/representave

�� 2

Right to informaon

��

�� 27

Right to express their views and to be heard ��28

Informed consent and right of refusal

��29

Condenality principle and data protecon for safety consideraons

��30

ualied professionals experienced with children

�� 31

he least intrusive method �� 31

Accuracy and margin of error

��34

ombining intrusiveness and accuracy ��36

Right to eecve remedy

�� 37

hapter 3 The age assessment process: implemenng a muldisciplinary and holisc approach ��38

Implemenng a holisc and muldisciplinary approach to the

e assessment process

��3

Flow chart of the age assessment process �� 40

Guidance on the age assessment process �� 41

When considering whether age assessment is necessary or not

�� 41

When conducng age assessment

�� 42

Chapter 4 Overview of the age assessment methods

��44

Flow chart of the methods

��

��44

Guidance on the gradual implementaon of methods �� 45

Non-medical methods �� 47

B. Medical methods (radiaon-free)

�� 5

C. Medical methods (using radiaon)

�� 56

hapter 5 Final recommendaons

��6

Annex 1 Glossary

��64

Annex 2 The best interests of the child and age assessment: praccal tools

�� 71

A. T

he best interests assessment form ��73

. The best interests of the child checklist for the purpose of age assessment

��7

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

��78

Annex 4 Overview of the methods and procedural safeguards in use in the

e assessment processes

��10

Annex 5 Bibliography

�� 111

Contents

EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 7

Abbreviaons

ADCS Association of Directors of Children’s Services Ltd is the national leadership association

in England for statutory directors of children’s services and their senior management

teams

AGFAD German Association of Forensic Medicine

ALARA used in radiation safety, it stands for ‘as low as reasonably achievable’

AMIF Asylum and Migration Integration Fund

APD recast Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26

ne 2013

on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection. It has

also been mentioned as the ‘asylum procedures directive’ recast

APR proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing

a common procedure for international protection in the Union and repealing

Directive

13/32/EU

AT Austria

ATD Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5

Apr

il 2011

on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims,

and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA. It has also been cited as

the ‘anti-trafficking directive’

BE Belgium

BG Bulgaria

BIA best interests assessment

BIC best interests of the child

BID best interests determination

CEAS Common European Asylum System

CFR Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

COI country of origin information

CRC Convention on the Rights of the Child

CT/CAT computed tomography/computed axial tomography

CY Cyprus

DE Germany

DK Denmark

Dublin III

regulation recast

Regulation (EU) No

4/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26

2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State

responsible for examining an application for asylum lodged in one of the Member

States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast)

EASO European Asylum Support Office

EE Estonia

EMN European Migration Network

ES Spain

8 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion

EU+ states: EU Member States plus Norway and Switzerland

EU European Union

Eurodac European Asylum Dactyloscopy Database

Eurodac regulation

recast

Regulation (EU) No 603/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of

ne 2013 on the establishment of ‘Eurodac’ for the comparison of fingerprints

for the effective application of Regulation (EU) No

4/2013 establishing the criteria

and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an

application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a

third-country national or a stateless person and on requests for the comparison with

Eurodac data by Member States’ law enforcement authorities and Europol for law

enforcement purposes, and amending Regulation (EU) No

77/2011 establishing a

European agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the

area of freedom, security and justice (recast)

FRA European Union Agency for Fundamental Human Rights

FI Finland

FR France

1951 Geneva

Convention

United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 (and the Protocol

Relating to the Status of Refugees 1967)

HU Hungary

ICRC International Committee of the Red Cross

IE Ireland

Implementing

Regulation

8/2014

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No

8/2014 of 30

nuary 2014 amending

Regulation (EC) No

156

0/2003 laying down detailed rules for the application of

Council Regulation (EC) No

3/2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for

determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application

lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national

IOM International Organisation for Migration (United Nations Migration Agency)

IP international protection

IT Italy

JRC Joint Research Centre, the European Commission’s science and knowledge service

which employs scientists to carry out research in order to provide independent

scientific advice and support to European Union policy

LT Lithuania

LU Luxembourg

LV Latvia

MRI magnetic resonance imaging

MS EU Member State(s)

MT Malta

NGO non-governmental organisation

NIDOS NIDOS Foundation (guardianship institute for unaccompanied minor applicants for

international protection in the Netherlands)

NL Netherlands

EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 9

NO Norway

OHCHR Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights

PL Poland

PT Portugal

QD recast Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13

cember

2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons

as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for

persons eligible for subsidiary protection and for the content of the protection

granted (recast). It has also been cited as the ‘qualification directive’ (recast)

RCD recast Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013

laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection

(recast). It has also been cited as the ‘reception conditions directive’ recast

RO Romania

SCEP separated children in Europe programme

SE Sweden

SIS a large-scale information system that supports external border control and law

enforcement cooperation in the Schengen area

SI Slovenia

SK Slovakia

SLTD a database that contains records on stolen, lost or revoked travel documents such

as passports, identity cards, UN laissez-passer or visa stamps

THB trafficking in human beings

UAM unaccompanied minor(s)

UK United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

Unicef United Nations Children’s Fund

VIS Visa Information System

EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 11

Execuve summary

Age assessment remains a complex process with possible far-reaching consequences for applicants

undergoing the assessment. Age assessment methods and processes differ across Member States and

reliable multidisciplinary and rights-compliant age assessment processes are not always guaranteed. In

view of these challenges, the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the

Council, ‘The protection of children in migration’ (COM(2017) 211 of 12

ril 2017), called for the European

Asylum Support Office (EASO) to update its guidance on age assessment in 2017.

The focus of this publication is to provide guidance on the consideration of the best interests of the child

(BIC) when assessing the need for the age examination but also when devising and undertaking an age

assessment using a holistic and multidisciplinary approach, with particular attention to the needs and

circumstances of the person.

To support the authorities on the implementation of the principle of the BIC, this publication:

▪

analyses the impact of age assessment on other rights of the applicant and the motivation for the

assessment;

▪

offers guidance on the application of the necessary principles and safeguards in the assessment

process;

▪

describes how to implement the assessment process using a holistic and multidisciplinary approach;

▪

provides a visual model of the potential process highlighting the gradual use of methods to prevent

unnecessary examinations;

▪

explores new methods used to assess an applicant’s age, the latest developments of the methods

already in use and the impact of each method on the safeguards and rights of the applicant;

▪

provides key recommendations to address practical challenges that might appear prior to, after

and at different stages during the process;

▪

contains a set of tools and reference documents to complement the information provided in this

practical guide:

▪

a glossary with key terms,

▪

international, European and national legal framework and policy-guidance documents relevant

to the topic,

▪

practical tools for ensuring the BIC (a form and a checklist), and

▪

an updated overview of the methods and procedural safeguards in use in the EU+ territory.

A number of challenges faced during the undertaking of the age assessment process, such as the

(in)sufficient motivation for an age assessment, the limitations of the methods in use concerning

intrusiveness and accuracy, fragmented estimations based only on the physical appearance, the primary

use of medical methods (in some cases only ionising ones), repetitive examinations being conducted

on the same applicant in different Member States (MS) or a low implementation of key safeguards in

the process (i.e. the lack of guardian/representative or effective remedy) have been identified and are

addressed in this publication.

In response to these challenges, EASO has devised key recommendations, which will be discussed in depth

in this publication. These can be summarised as follows.

□ The BIC should be observed not only when a child is identified as such but also when there are doubts

as to whether the applicant may be a child.

□ Age assessment should not be a routine practice. The necessity of the assessment should be duly

justified based on substantiated doubts on the stated age.

□ The implementation of the principle of the BIC requires a child-centred age assessment which should

place the child at the centre and be adapted to the specific needs of the applicant (gender, range of

disputed age, cultural background, etc.).

12 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion

□ Benefit of the doubt must be given as soon as doubts on the claimed age appear, during the age

assessment and until conclusive results are provided. The applicant should be considered and treated

as a child until he or she is found to be an adult.

□ The child, or the presumed child, must be appointed a guardian/representative who ensures that

the child can participate in the assessment, has been informed about the age assessment process

in a child-friendly, gender-sensitive and age-appropriate manner in a language that the child can

understand and does, in fact, fully understand the assessment process. This information is essential

to allow the child to express views, wishes and opinions and make an informed decision to participate

in the process.

□ The age assessment process must be conducted using a holistic and multidisciplinary approach which

ensures that all the necessary safeguards and principles explored are in place and the rights of the

applicant are protected.

□ Since no single method currently available can determine the exact age of a person, a combination

of methods assessing not only the physical development but also the maturity and the psychological

development of the applicant can reduce the range of age in question.

□ No method involving nudity or the examination, observation or measurement of genitalia or intimate

parts should be used for age assessment purposes.

EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 13

Introducon

Why was this second edion developed?

As mentioned in the EU action plan on unaccompanied minors (2010-2014), and due to the concerns on

the reliability and intrusiveness of methodologies in place to assess the age of the applicants, EASO was

entrusted with developing a publication which compiles best practices on age assessment. A first edition

was published in December 2013. Similar concerns about the challenges in the age assessment process

were once again raised by national authorities during the third EASO Annual Conference on Children

held in December 2015 in Malta. In practice, age assessment, and in particular some of the methods,

has rapidly evolved since 2013. It is thus considered to be an opportune time for further reflection and

analysis of the latest developments. In line with the conclusions of the conference and the Commission

communication on the protection of children in migration

(

), EASO has developed this new edition

including updated information and enhanced recommendations on the age assessment process. For

this purpose, EASO further mapped the age assessment methodologies and procedural safeguards used

in the EU+ territory in 2016. The key findings of this research can be found throughout the publication

in boxes entitled ‘Key findings from EU+ states’ practice’, and examples from practice have been added

where relevant and in Annex 4.

How does this second edion relate to other EASO support tools?

EASO’s mission is to support EU Member States and associated countries (Liechtenstein, Norway and

Switzerland) on the implementation of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS). This support is

delivered, in part, through common training, a common level of quality and common country of origin

information (COI). As with all EASO support tools, this publication is based on the common standards of

the CEAS. Furthermore; this publication should be seen as a complement to the other EASO tools that

address child-sensitive asylum processes, in particular the EASO practical guide on family tracing (

) and

the EASO training module on interviewing children

(

)�

What is the content of this publicaon?

This second edition contains a set of reference and guidance materials on age assessment as well as a

mapping of the current state of play in the EU+ states.

In a nutshell, the edition is structured around five interlinked pillars.

▪

The first chapter, Circumstances of age assessment, is an introduction to the topic, addressing the

preconditions, motivation and objectives of the age assessment process.

▪

The second chapter, Best interests of the child and procedural safeguards, addresses how the

principle of the BIC, as enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)

and in the EU asylum acquis, can be operationalised and the procedural safeguards implemented

in the age assessment process.

▪

The third chapter, The age assessment process: implementing a multidisciplinary and holistic

approach, analyses how the process should be conducted using a multidisciplinary and holistic

approach and according to the guidance contained in this publication. It also includes a flow chart

to visualise the main steps to be followed when age assessment needs to be undertaken.

(

) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council — The protection of children in migration — COM(2017) 211, 12 April 2017,

available at: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/20170412_communication_on_

the_protection_of_children_in_migration_en.pdf

(

) Available at EASO’s website: https://www.easo.europa.eu/training-quality/vulnerable-groups

(

) Further information available at EASO’s website: https://www.easo.europa.eu/sites/default/files/EASO_TRAINING_BROCHURE_EN-2016.pdf

14 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion

▪

The fourth chapter, Overview of the age assessment methods, covers the latest developments

in methods already explored in the first edition as well as new methods addressing their potential

(positive and negative) impact on the safeguards. Particular attention is given to methods that

were not in use in 2013 or that have evolved substantially since then.

▪

The fifth chapter, Final recommendations, compiles key recommendations that have been

formulated to enhance an efficient age assessment process while guaranteeing children’s rights.

This publication is completed by a series of annexes

�

▪

Annex 1: Glossary

This annex is aimed at facilitating the identification and/or developing a common understanding

of the most relevant terms used in the age assessment process.

▪

Annex 2: Best interests of the child and age assessment: practical tools

This annex consists of a best interests assessment (BIA) form and a BIC checklist to assess whether

the particular age assessment process guarantees that the necessary procedural safeguards that

ensure the adequate protection of the rights of the individual child are in place.

▪

Annex 3: Legal framework and policy guidance

This annex is intended to serve as a reference point for identifying the relevant instruments and

provisions at international, European and national level. In addition, it includes soft-law guidance

instruments and relevant case-law. It also encompasses relevant policy-guidance references on

this topic.

▪

Annex 4: An overview of EU+ states’ practices on age assessment

This annex includes the methodology and procedural safeguards used by the EU+ states when

conducting the process.

▪

Annex 5: Bibliography

A compilation of the sources consulted to develop or inspire the content of this publication.

What is the scope of this second edion?

This publication provides further guidance on the core aspects of the age assessment process such as

the holistic and multidisciplinary approach, the implementation of the principle of the BIC and an update

of the information collected for the first edition of the publication. While this publication addresses age

assessment for the specific purpose of international protection procedures, it may also serve as a useful

reference in other contexts where age assessment is required (migrant children, minimum age of criminal

responsibility, etc.).

As significant aspects, such as the applicable methodologies, evolve rapidly, this guide is not meant to

exhaust the topic of age assessment. Therefore, depending on the needs of the target group, additional

editions of this guide may be required.

How was this second edion developed?

This publication was developed by EASO and reviewed by the European Commission, EU agencies, experts

from EU+ states and international and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). Valuable input was further

provided during two ad hoc working group meetings held in September 2016. The diverse composition of

the working groups guaranteed a comprehensive and multidisciplinary contribution from experts. These

included social workers, forensic anthropologists and radiology researchers, as well as policy officers

and reception officers. There were also asylum case officers with expertise on children from EU+ states’

representatives (BE, IE, NL, LT, NO), the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) and the United

Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), as well as from relevant international organisations

and NGOs with expertise in the field, such as the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), the Nidos

Foundation (NIDOS), the UK Red Cross and the separated children in Europe programme (SCEP) within

EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 15

Defence for Children International. This publication is the product of combined expertise, reflecting the

common standards and the shared objective to achieve safe and efficient age assessment processes within

high-quality international protection procedures.

How should this guide be used?

For the purpose of this guide, some of the terms that are commonly used in the content of this publication

(age assessment, biological age, chronological age, child, guardian, EU+ states) with their specific meanings are

defined below for better comprehension. The glossary (Annex

1 t

o the publication) contains further information

on these terms and additional terminology identified as useful for the age assessment stakeholders.

Age assessment is the process by which authorities seek to estimate the chronological age or range of age

of a person in order to establish whether an individual is a child or an adult.

Biological age is defined by an individual’s present position with respect to his or her potential life span,

meaning that an individual may be younger or older than his or her chronological age.

Chronological age is measured in years, months and days from the moment when the person was born.

Child and minor are considered synonyms (any person below the age of 18) and both terms are used in

this publication. EASO’s preferred term is ‘child’; however, the term ‘minor’ is used when it is explicitly

referenced by a legal provision. For the purpose of this publication focusing on asylum-seeking children,

the term used to refer to the person whose age is not established is the applicant�

stated above, the expression unaccompanied child is applied as a synonym of unaccompanied minor

and is defined as a child/minor who arrives in the territory of the EU+ states unaccompanied by an adult

responsible for him or her, whether by law or by the practice of the state concerned, and for as long as

he or she is not effectively taken into the care of such a person/adult. It includes a child/minor who is left

unaccompanied after he or she has entered the EU+ territory.

There is no general consensus on the definition of guardian and, in practice, a guardian is often assimilated

to the figure of the representative of the child or social worker. However, for the purpose of this guide, a

guardian is considered to be an independent person appointed by a national authority who safeguards

the child’s best interests and general well-being. In the context of the reform of the CEAS

(

), the European

Commission has proposed to replace the reference to the ‘representative’ in the current EU asylum legal

instruments to ‘guardian’. As the CEAS reform was still under discussion at the time of this publication, the

reference to guardian/representative is used throughout the text.

The EU asylum acquis consists of the following set of EU legal instruments: the ‘reception conditions

directive’ recast, the ‘asylum procedures directive’ (APD) recast, the ‘qualification directive’ recast,

the ‘temporary protection directive’, the ‘Dublin regulation III’ and the ‘Eurodac regulation’ recast (

)�

A compilation of international, European and national provisions and legal instruments related to age

assessment can be found in Annex

3 ‘L

egal framework and policy guidance’ of this publication.

For the purpose of this guide, the EU Member States plus Norway and Switzerland are referred to as

EU+ states

�

(

) Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common procedure for international protection in the Union and repealing

Directive 2013/32/EU (COM(2016) 467 final, 2016/0224 (COD)), available at https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2016/EN/1-2016-467-EN-F1-1.PDF

�

t the time of writing, it cannot be known whether the Commission’s proposal will result in a new regulation or what its precise terms will be. The reader should,

therefore, simply be aware that at some point in the future, there is the possibility that the APD (recast) may be repealed and replaced by a regulation with some

amended provisions.

(

) The legal texts and their translations are available at:

‘reception conditions directive’ recast, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32013L0033;

‘asylum procedures directive’ recast at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32013L0032;

‘qualification directive’ recast at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32011L0095;

‘Dublin regulation III’ at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32013R0604;

‘Eurodac regulation’ at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32013R0603�

16 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Circumstances of age assessment

Chapter 1 Circumstances of age assessment

Age is an essential element of a child’s identity. The EU acquis (

) as well as the CRC (Article 1) define

childhood by reference to age:

A child/minor is any person below 18 years of age.

Two main consequences derive from this definition. The first one is that the convention applies to every

person under 18

ars of age. Secondly, as established in the EU acquis, any international protection applicant

under 18

ars of age is entitled to child-sensitive procedural safeguards and special reception conditions.

Despite continuously changing, age is an innate characteristic of one’s identity

� As

part of the personal

status of a person it determines the relationship between the state and the person. As such, changes in

age may trigger specific rights and obligations, for example being considered an adult when someone turns

18. However, the age of 18 is not always the determining factor for acquiring new rights and obligations or

full capacity in some aspects such as military service, the emancipation age and minimum age of criminal

responsibility, the age of consent for marriage or the age for employment or sexual relations. Depending

on national legislation, these thresholds may be reached at an earlier chronological age.

When known, the age of a person rules the relation between the person and the state, and consequently

determines Articles 7 a

nd 8 of the CRC establish the following state parties’ age-related key obligations:

▪

respect the right of the child to preserve his or her identity; and therefore

▪

re-establish in a speedy manner his or her identity.

According to these provisions, all children should be registered at birth and provided with documental

evidence of their identity. However, statistics from the United Nations (

) indicate that over the period 2003-

2007, less than 10

% o

f African countries

(

) reported the total number of live births, in contrast to the

European countries’ rate (90

. Low birth registration rates in countries of origin is one of the reasons why

international protection applicants may arrive in the EU without documents or with documents that are

considered to be unreliable. The rate of birth registration is not uniform across the main countries of origin

of international protection applicants; for example, in Somalia only 3

% o

f children under 5

ars of age

were registered at birth, while in Afghanistan this number rises to 37 % (

) (these percentages relate to the

current birth rate). According to the UN statistics division, that number drops to under 6-10

% f

or children

who were born 14-18 years ago (ages of the unaccompanied children arriving in Europe). Furthermore,

other factors, such as a rural origin or belonging to a minority or particular social group (castes, tribe, etc.),

may hinder access to birth registration. The lack of awareness of its importance or the lack of knowledge

on how to register the birth also deepens the disparity of birth registration within the same country. The

low birth registration rates result in children having difficulties to prove their identity and age through

documentary evidence, and as a consequence may end up unprotected and deprived of the rights they are

entitled to. In addition to the lack of registration, the issuance of birth certificates may not be possible in

countries experiencing war or armed conflict or where the authorities are unwilling to provide them. The

absence of documents that prove that the child is under 18

ars of age can have a direct effect on their

recognition as child right holders. Consequently, children may end up being treated as adults on matters

such as, among others, army service, marriage and access to the labour market and to justice.

As chronological age does not play an important role in the acquisition of an adult status in all cultures, it is

important to take the cultural factor into consideration. In some cultures, children are treated as adults as

soon as they experience certain physical changes or become part of a separate family (for example through

(

) See Article 2(d) RCD, Article 2(l) APD, Article 2(k) QD, Article 2(i) Dublin III regulation and Article 2(6) ATD.

(

) http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/CRVS/VS_availability.htm

(

) Ibid., based on complete registration systems.

(

) http://data.unicef.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Birth_registration_May-2016.xlsx

Circumstances of age assessment EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 17

the practice of child marriage). For these reasons, it is common that they may not know their chronological

age and find it difficult to understand its importance in Western cultures. Since the chronological age may

not be an identifying feature for their position in their community or relationship to others (in some regions

children are always registered as having been born on the first of January of the year they were born in,

irrespective of if they were born in any other month), this cultural difference may result in somewhat

vague statements regarding dates of birth or age.

In the context of international protection, the age of the applicant is a key indicator of special protection

needs (

) (children, elderly). Belonging to certain age groups triggers the application of special/additional

procedural guarantees during international protection procedures as well as special reception conditions

(such as the right to be placed in suitable and safe accommodation, the right to education and specific

healthcare, the limitation of administrative detention for migration purposes in exceptional cases and

the obligation to look first for viable alternatives to detention). In the case of children, or while there are

doubts about the applicant’s age, theBIC must be given primary consideration throughout the procedure.

Furthermore, age is also significantly relevant for child-specific types of claims (forced/early marriage,

forced recruitment, female genital mutilation, child trafficking, family and domestic violence, forced labour,

prostitution and child pornography)

(

)�

yond the context of international protection, the age of a person has implications when involving the

authorities in other procedures, such as giving consent to marriage, reporting underage sexual relationships,

accepting or refusing healthcare treatments, access to the labour market, ensuring access to other rights (right

to education, etc.) and implications for criminal responsibility (minimum age of criminal responsibility, etc.).

Consequently, when the age is unknown and there are substantiated doubts concerning the age, authorities

may need to assess the age of the person to determine whether the person is an adult or a child. In cases

where the applicant is obviously a child or where in absence of contradicting evidence the applicant’s

physical appearance, demeanour and psychological maturity undoubtedly indicate that the applicant is

significantly over 18

ars old, age assessment may not be necessary. However, if there is contradicting

evidence beyond the physical appearance, for example if the person looks significantly over 18 years of age,

but has documentation that indicates that he or she is a child, an age assessment could still be required.

In fact, the necessity of an age assessment implies the existence of doubt about the age and therefore the

possibility of the applicant being a child.

Doubts may arise not only when the applicant is claiming to be a child but also when he or she claims to

be an adult. Children on the move may pretend to be adults in order to avoid the protective measures of

the authorities. This may be done for different reasons; for example, they may wish to continue migrating

to the intended destination and so want to avoid supervised accommodation with, in some cases, limited

freedom of movement or where they would be separated from accompanying adults. Often, children

may claim to be adults to be allowed to work, to marry or because they consider themselves to be adults

responsible for the well-being of the family left behind. However, in other cases, children could just be

following instructions given by smugglers or traffickers. In such cases, smugglers or traffickers try to keep

children off the radar so that they remain unprotected, making them easy prey for later exploitation.

Awareness of this phenomenon can facilitate early identification

(

) of a victim, or a potential victim, of

trafficking in human beings (THB) and break the chain of exploitation.

In conclusion, age assessment is the process by which authorities seek to estimate the chronological age

or range of age of a person in order to establish whether an individual is a child or an adult.

The correct identification of an individual as a child or as an adult is crucial to ensure that children’s rights

are protected and guaranteed as well as to prevent adults from being placed amongst children in order to

take advantage of additional rights or safeguards (such as access to education, appointment of a guardian/

representative) that are not afforded to them.

(

) See, for instance, the non-exhaustive list of vulnerable applicants provided by Article 21 RCD recast.

(

) UNHCR, Guidelines on international protection: child asylum claims under Articles 1(A)2 and 1(F) of the 1951 convention and/or 1967 protocol relating to the

status of refugees, 22 December 2009, HCR/GIP/09/08, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4b2f4f6d2.html�

(

) EASO has developed an online tool to assist national authorities on the timely identification of persons with special procedural and/or reception needs

(IPSN), available at https://ipsn.easo.europa.eu/�

18 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Circumstances of age assessment

The age assessment from a fundamental rights perspecve

A number of fundamental rights enshrined by the CRC and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the

European Union (CFR)

(

) are of particular relevance in the age assessment process.

The best interests of the child (Article 3 CRC and Article 24 CFR)

The BIC must be primarily considered in all actions concerning children. They are therefore to be applicable

from the moment that it is considered that the applicant may be below 18

ars of age, throughout the

assessment of the age if such assessment is necessary and until conclusive results indicate that the applicant

is an adult.

Right to non-discrimination (Article 2 CRC and Article 21 CFR)

Every person should be treated with objectivity and be individually considered. It is crucial to avoid

preconceived ideas about certain nationalities, ethnicities, etc. when assessing age.

Right to identity (Articles 1, 7 and 8 CRC)

Age is as much a part of a person’s identity as their name, nationality, citizenship and family status are.

It determines the rights and obligations of a person as well as the state’s obligations towards the person

(e.g. to provide protection, education, healthcare). One of these obligations is to reinstate the identity of

someone who has been unlawfully deprived of it, effectively obliging the state to provide proof of it and to

guarantee the recognition and respect of these rights by others. An incorrect age assessment may cause

permanent damage if it impedes access to one’s rights and the possibility to exercise them, as well as the

recognition of these rights by others. An incorrectly conducted age assessment can result in children being

placed in vulnerable situations. This could mean that children end up interacting with or being placed among

adults or adults ending up incorrectly placed with children, a scenario which is particularly concerning.

Right to express their views freely and right to be heard (Articles 12 and 14 CRC and Articles 24 and 41 CFR)

This is a fundamental right with far-reaching effects. It encompasses the child’s right to express his or

her own views freely and the right to have his or her views taken into account and given due weight in

accordance with their age and maturity. In cases where the applicant’s age is in doubt, special caution must

be taken to prevent subjective or arbitrary considerations (for example, the age at which a child can form

his or her own views) when taking the views of the child into account according to their level of maturity.

Special consideration should also be given when dealing with persons with disabilities and other special

needs (e.g. illiteracy).

Strictly connected to the right to express their views and the right to effective remedy is the right to be

heard, before any individual measure which would affect him or her adversely is taken in administrative

or judicial proceedings.

Right to information

Information is key in enabling someone to understand the age assessment process as well as the rights

and obligations that the process entails. Furthermore, when consent is required, the person should give

consent based on accurate and comprehensive information and be able to provide it freely without any

kind of pressure or condition.

(

) The CFR is available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:12012P/TXT�

Circumstances of age assessment EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 19

Respect of dignity and right to integrity (Articles 3 and 37 CRC and Articles 1, 3 and 5 CFR)

The age assessment process must respect the applicant’s dignity as well as his or her physical integrity. As

age assessment examinations requiring the exhibition of intimate parts or nudity are highly intrusive and

have no medical purpose, these must be avoided. The exhibition of physical parts is especially traumatic

and difficult to understand for children, adolescents and applicants with different cultural backgrounds.

These examinations are particularly distressing and possibly re-traumatising for children who may have

been exposed to abuse or other risky situations during their migration experience or have had experiences

of persecution or serious harm.

Respect for private life and the protection of personal data (Article

CRC and Articles

7 a

nd 8 CFR)

This right protects the private life of children against arbitrary interference by public authorities and private

organisations, such as the media. This protection covers four distinct areas: private life, family life, home

and correspondence. Interference by authorities into personal life needs to be justified, limited to the

maximum extent and ruled by a precise set of norms. Under EU law, personal data can only be gathered

legally under strict conditions, for a legitimate purpose, obtained with the consent of the person or of

his or her representative, or legally justified. Otherwise, this interference becomes arbitrary or unlawful.

Persons or organisations collecting and managing personal information must ensure protection from

misuse and must respect the rights of the data owners guaranteed by EU law. Children and their guardians/

representatives should be informed about the data that is going to be collected under the respective

national legal framework. In the international protection context, caution must be taken when collecting

data to prevent any breach of information that could endanger the applicant or his or her family.

Right to an effective remedy (Articles

and 47 CFR)

This right implies that the outcomes of the process can be challenged and that the information and

assistance needed to exercise this right is available to children. Financial costs incurred from challenging

the age assessment decision shall not be borne by the applicant; otherwise the right to effective remedy

would not be effectively exercised.

Most of these fundamental rights are reflected as principles (the BIC) and procedural safeguards by

international and European legislation, in particular in the EU asylum acquis, as shown in the next chapter.

20 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards

Chapter 2 The best interests of the child and

procedural safeguards

The best interests of the child

The principle of the BIC is deeply rooted in the European human rights and asylum legislation and the

international legal framework

(

)�

‘In

all actions relating to children, whether taken by public authorities or private institutions, the

ild’s

interests must be a primary consideration.’ (Article

CFR)

The BIC, as an overarching principle, demands continuous consideration from the moment the child is

found until a durable solution is selected for the child.

In the context of international protection any indication that the applicant could be a child should

immediately trigger the consideration of the BIC in all actions affecting him or her and therefore also

throughout the asylum procedure. In this regard, host EU+ states are responsible for observing the BIC

not only in the asylum procedures but also in all other processes and decisions affecting children, such as

in the age assessment process.

As stated by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child

(

), the BIC is a threefold concept.

(a) A substantive right: the right of the child to have his or her best interests assessed and taken as a

primary consideration when different interests are being considered in order to reach a decision on the

issue at stake, and the guarantee that this right will be implemented whenever a decision is to be made

concerning a child, a group of identified or unidentified children or children in general.

(b) A fundamental, interpretative legal principle: if a legal provision is open to more than one interpretation,

the interpretation which most effectively serves the child’s best interests should be chosen.

group of children or children in general, the decision-making process must include an evaluation of the

possible impact (positive or negative) of the decision on the child or children concerned.

Assessing and determining the BIC requires procedural guarantees. Furthermore, the justification of a

decision must show that the BIC have been explicitly taken into account. In this regard, authorities shall

explain how the right has been respected in the decision, i.e. what has been considered to be in the child’s

best interests; what criteria it has been based on; and how the child’s interests have been weighed against

other considerations, be they broad issues of policy or individual cases.

Consequently and in compliance with the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child’s general comment,

the decision to undertake age assessment and the methods selected in order to assess age should also be

subject to primary consideration of the BIC.

(

) Article 3 CRC, Article 24 CFR; EU asylum acquis: Article 23 RCD recast, Article 11 RCD recast, Article 25.6 APD recast, Article 20.5 QD and Article 6 Dublin III

regulation recast.

(

) General Comment No 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration (Article 3, para. 1), available

at: http://www2.ohchr.org/English/bodies/crc/docs/GC/CRC_C_GC_14_ENG.pdf�

The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 21

Assessing the best interests of the child for the purpose of the age assessment

A BIA verifies that the age assessment process serves the child’s best interests, that the necessary procedural

safeguards are in place, that the rights of the individual child are protected and that the results are expected

to dispel the doubts on the age of the applicant. The BIA should consider the specific circumstances of the

child as well as ensure that the BIC are given primary consideration when deciding whether to have his or

her age assessed and how. For this reason, the age assessment process must be child-centred, taking into

consideration the specific circumstances and needs of the applicant.

In light of this, the BIA should be conducted prior to any decision affecting the child being taken, therefore

before deciding to conduct the age assessment process.

In case further actions are needed, the BIA will require a follow-up to ensure that the best interests are

considered. The decision on undertaking an age assessment should consider the outcome of the BIA

interview and all the information in the child’s file. If the age assessment is not deemed necessary and

useful considering the expected results, it should not be undertaken�

Furthermore, the following factors are of particular importance when considering the BIC for the specific

purpose of age assessment in the context of international protection.

• Security and safety considerations (

): upon arrival or at a later stage, children sometimes claim to be

adults in order to avoid the accommodation for children. Such accommodation has more protective

measures such as limitations on the freedom of movement and allocated staff to take care of them.

This may be due to a number of different reasons, for example the wish to remain undetected in

order to continue moving to the intended destination. On other occasions, this alleged adulthood

may be part of the background story that they have been instructed to tell the authorities or other

actors when asked about their age. The sources of these background stories can be quite diverse.

They could be instructed by relatives or accompanying adults who want to prevent separation, or

by smugglers; however, it could also come from a member of the trafficking network who wants to

keep control over and have easy access to the child during his or her stay in the territory. Therefore

it is very important to keep in mind that a doubtful claim of adulthood may be an indicator that the

applicant is a potential victim of THB, and authorities should act accordingly (signposting and referring

to relevant national services, including possible assessment as a victim of THB).

• Child’s well-being (

): if the age assessment is justified, the methods used must be the least intrusive

for the child, the most accurate to assess the range of age, transparent and defined in accordance with

validated standards, as well as be auditable and reviewable. In order to ensure that the expectations of

the results of the methods are realistic, the margin of error must be identified and documented. The

doubts and concerns of the child must be attended to and any reasons for a refusal to undergo the

assessment must be explored and alternatives provided, if available. Requests of the child or of his or

her guardian/representative must be attended to to the maximum extent possible in order to preserve

the well-being of the child and to reduce the distress of the examinations (limiting the number of

people in the examination or interview room, with the presence of the guardian/representative if

the child so requires, etc.).

•

ild’s background

(

): it is important to adapt the process to the child’s cultural background

(preferred gender of the examiner and interpreter) as well as to their experiences (the flight and the

migration to Europe that the child has gone through could cause or exacerbate their vulnerability).

• Specific circumstances: authorities shall weigh the applicant’s specific circumstances (range of

disputed age, the gender of the applicant, etc.) and needs, the potential positive and negative effects,

the views of the applicant, and if the particular methods in use are appropriate for the case.

(

) Article 23(2) RCD, Article 6 and recital 13 Dublin III regulation and recital 18 QD.

(

) As stated in Article 23(2) RCD, Article 6 Dublin III regulation and recitals 18 QD, 33 APD, 13 Dublin III and 20 APR.

(

) Article 23(2) RCD and recitals 33 APD, 13 Dublin III and 18 QD.

22 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards

As a reflection of the above, both international and European legal frameworks identify the following

standards and safeguards necessary for age assessment.

The benefit of the doubt shall be applied as broadly as possible in the case of unaccompanied children,

who are less likely to have documentary evidence.

Immediate access to a qualified, independent representative and/or guardian, who acts in the child’s

best interests, safeguards the general well-being and exercises the legal capacity.

The right to receive age-appropriate information in a language that he or she understands.

The right to participate and to have his or her views heard and considered according to his or her age

and maturity.

Informed consent and the right to refuse medical examinations.

Confidentiality, data protection and safety considerations

�

ild-friendly procedures conducted by qualified professionals who are aware of the cultural and ethnic

particularities.

Least intrusive method, least intrusive process (gradual implementation), gender- and culturally appropiate.

Accuracy and margin of error to be applied in the applicant’s favour.

Right to effective remedy as may be applicable.

When the process and the available resources do not guarantee the cited safeguards, as might occur in

situations of a large influx or disembarkation, the age assessment might be conducted at a later stage

or in two stages (with a preliminary screening upon arrival and a fully fledged age assessment once the

conditions allow it). In this scenario, benefit of the doubt is fully applicable and the claimed age must be

accepted until the conditions ensure that a safe and efficient age assessment can be conducted

(

)�

It s

hould be noted that while the guidance and tools provided in this publication only focus on the age

assessment process, the BIA is to be continued until a durable solution is found for the child. Furthermore,

the BIA does not intend to replace a best interests determination (BID), which is required when durable

solutions for the child are under consideration.

Applying the principle of the benet of the doubt

The benefit of the doubt is a key principle and safeguard in the field of age assessment since none of the

current methods of age assessment are able to determine a specific age with certainty.

Owing to the importance of this principle, benefit of the doubt repeatedly appears as a key procedural

safeguard in matters related to children, and also in the age assessment process in the EU asylum acquis

(Article 25(5) APD recast). Furthermore, the anti-trafficking directive (ATD) (

) clearly states that benefit

of the doubt should be applied when the age is uncertain, as follows.

(

) Further guidance and practical recommendations can be found in Chapter 4 and Annex 2 (the BIC tools).

(

) Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and

protecting its victims, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA, available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:

2011:101:0001:0011:EN:PDF�

The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 23

‘Member States shall ensure that, where the age of a person subject to trafficking in human beings is

uncertain and there are reasons to believe that the person is a child, that person is presumed to be a child

in order to receive immediate access to assistance, support and protection.’ (Article

13.

The issue becomes more complicated, since doubts about the age of an applicant are often a consequence

of a lack of documentary evidence. This is particularly common in the case of children. However, the age

assessment process might not dispel all doubts (results are often about 1 or 2 years below or above 18 years

old) due to the limitations of the current methods.

Age assessment should not be a routine practice. The need for age assessment should be duly justified based

on the substantiated doubts on the stated age, resorted to only in cases where there is an absence of evidence

and/or in cases where several elements of evidence gathered contradict the applicant’s claimed age. If the

available evidence does not contradict the age or it confirms the claimed age, then it should be accepted.

In cases where there is a lack of documentary evidence (such as passports, ID documents, residence

cards or travel documents such as those issued by the UNHCR, other countries’ certificates or religious or

civil certificates, probing the civil status — marriage, births, family booklet of the applicant or any family

member — with any reference to the age of the applicant), authorities may be uncertain or have simple

doubts about the age of the person.

In other cases, when documentation is missing and the claimed age is not supported or is contradicted

by several elements of evidence gathered by the authorities, doubts are considered to be substantiated

�

here harmful consequences may result from an incorrect consideration of the person as an adult or child,

the initiation of age assessment should be deemed necessary provided it is in the BIC.

Simple doubts

In case of a lack of valid documentation, if the claimed age (statements of the applicant) is supported

or confirmed by at least one of the following elements of evidence gathered by the authorities, then

the claimed age can be accepted without the need for age assessment.

▪

Information from other databases.

▪

Statements from other family members, relatives or the child’s guardian.

▪

First estimations of physical appearance.

The elements may be weighted differently according to the reliability of the specific element in

comparison to the others.

Substantiated doubts

In case of a lack of valid documentation, when the claimed age (statements of the applicant) is not

supported or is contradicted by several elements of evidence gathered by the authorities, then the

claimed age cannot be accepted and there will be a need for an age assessment.

▪

Information from other databases.

▪

Statements from other family members, relatives or the child’s guardian.

▪

First estimations of physical appearance (to be considered only in conjunction with the

previous elements, not only on its own).

The elements may be weighted differently according to the reliability of the specific element in

comparison to the others.

After the analysis of the previous elements, authorities may have substantiated doubts on the claimed

age, thus an age assessment process might be needed to estimate the age of the applicant.

24 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards

The age of the applicant as a material fact

In some particular cases, such as in the case of child-specific grounds for international protection (forced

marriage, child soldiers, etc.), the age of the applicant constitutes a material fact

(

) and is thus relevant

to the examination of the application for international protection. In these cases, even if the applicant’s

statements on age are not supported by documentary or other evidence, the statements will be found

credible and accepted without the need for further (age) assessment if the following conditions are met

(as established in Article

5 QD).

Required conditions to find the applicant’s statements credible even if not supported by evidence

Genuine eﬀort

to substanate

the applicaon

Relevant and

available

elements have

been submied

and a

sasfactory

explanaon

has been given

regarding the

missing elements

Coherent and

pausible

statements

The applicant

has applied as

soon as

possible for

internaonal

protecon

For e.g. physical

appearance

and

psychological

maturity are

consistent

with the

claimed age,

the informaon

is consistent

with COI, etc.

or good

jusﬁcaon

has been

given

otherwise

Generally

credible

This is a particularly important provision for unaccompanied children who may be less likely to have

documentary evidence, and especially so in cases of applicants for international protection.

The information should be assessed by asylum or migration officials and should take into account the

individual and contextual situation of the applicant. In the case of children or presumed children, and

especially when unaccompanied, the level of expectations regarding available evidence and consistency

in explanations should be lower.

The benet of the doubt throughout the age assessment process

Due to the inaccuracy and potential intrusiveness of the current methodologies in use, the systematic

application of benefit of the doubt throughout the whole age assessment process is crucial. It is necessary to

acknowledge and establish the margin of error of the current methods within the process, and its influence

on the results. These shortcomings should not be detrimental to the applicant’s rights or statements; on the

contrary, a proper implementation of benefit of the doubt should lead authorities to interpret inconclusive

results in the applicant’s favour, in dubio pro refugio or in dubio pro minore�

‘Member States may use medical examinations to determine the age of unaccompanied minors within

the framework of the examination of an application for international protection where, following general

statements or other relevant indications, Member States have doubts concerning the applicant’s age. If,

thereafter, Member States are still in doubt concerning the applicant’s age, they shall assume that the

applicant is a minor.’ (Article 25.5 APD)

(

) As defined in the EASO practical guide: evidence assessment module, material facts are (alleged) facts that are linked to one or more of the requisites of

the definition of a refugee or person eligible for subsidiary protection.

The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 25

An ultimate benefit of the application of this principle to the identification phase for children is that this

principle provides an immediate answer to any doubts and does not require a costly or lengthy process

to achieve it. Additionally, it might and should be applied before and at any stage of the assessment

where any doubts are raised by the experts involved in the process (the experts conducting the age

assessment or when interpreting the results). This is especially relevant in situations of high influx

where authorities have to make rapid decisions and resources are overstretched. Nevertheless, while

facing the possibility of dealing with a child, he or she must not be considered as an adult and must

therefore not be placed in adult accommodation or in detention facilities, either before or during

the assessment

�

e applicant shall be considered and treated as a child throughout these steps:

Practical implementation of the principle of the benefit of the doubt

Lack of

documentaon but

other informaon is

consistent with the

claimed age

During age

assessment

At any stage

of the process

Aer age

assessment

• Simple doubts,

so no need for

age assessment

• Whilst doubts

remain

• When any of the

results of the age

assessment

indicate

childhood

• Inconclusive

results: always

taking the lowest

age of the range

The benefit of the doubt is therefore applicable in the following cases:

When the claimed age (statements of the applicant) is not supported by documentation but is consistent

with other elements of evidence gathered by the authorities, benefit of the doubt directly applies, meaning

that there would not be any need for age assessment.

• In cases where age assessment is undertaken, the individual should be afforded benefit of the doubt

and treated as a child for the duration of the process and for as long as any doubt remains�

• If

any of the methods applied during age assessment obtain a result indicating childhood, the

assessment shall stop there and the lowest age of the range is to be taken as valid.

• Finally, if after the process has ended the results are still inconclusive, age assessment shall consider

the lowest age of the range as valid

(

)�

(

) See Article 25.5 APD recast and the UN committee’s General Comment No 6.

26 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

The applicant is considered a child during age assessment in 17 EU+ states.

One Member State applies a margin of error of 2

ars in the applicant’s favour once the results are

received.

Two EU+ states do not apply benet of the doubt.

Further informaon can be found in Annex 4 to this publicaon.

Guardian/representave

As a key safeguard for unaccompanied children, the presumed child should be appointed an independent

and qualified guardian/representative as soon as possible (see Article

25(

1) APD).

A representative is a person or an organisation appointed by competent bodies in order to assist and

represent an unaccompanied child in procedures. The representative ensures the BIC and exercises legal

capacity for the child where necessary

(

). The representative should be appointed as soon as possible

and before the commencement of any age assessment examination. In addition, the representative must

be independent in order to avoid any conflict of interests, thus ensuring that he or she acts in the BIC

as established in Articles

(1) and 25(1)(a) APD recast as well as in Article

RCD recast. Where, for

practical reasons, a permanent guardian cannot be assigned swiftly to a child, provisions should be made

for the appointment of a person who temporarily carries out the guardian’s tasks. In such cases, temporary

guardians must have the same conditions (qualifications and independency) as non-temporary guardians.

The representative should be informed and consulted about all the aspects of the age assessment process

and should be able to accompany the child during the examinations, if the child so wishes. When age

assessment is considered to be in the child’s best interests, yet the child does not agree to it, the guardian/

representative could potentially still give consent to the assessment. However, this needs to be well

communicated between the child and their representative in order not to jeopardise the relationship of

trust between them.

The guardian/representative should also be present in the BIA interview, if possible. The child’s legal

counsel, if available, should also be contacted and given the opportunity to attend the BIA interview

(

)�

The process should continue with the presence of the guardian/representative, unless the child requests

otherwise. Either way, the guardian/representative should closely follow the process in order to be able

to advise the applicant when needed.

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

The presence of an independent person to support the applicant during the examinaons is allowed in

23 EU+ states. In 12 of them, this role is exercised by the guardian or representave.

One EU+ state only allows this independent person for Dublin cases.

One EU+ state allows the presence of a supporve person during forensic examinaon.

One EU+ state does not allow it.

Further informaon can be found in Annex

4 t

o this publicaon.

(

) Article 2(n) APD.

(

) For that purpose, the BIA checklist included in Annex 2 can be of use.

The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 27

Additional guidance regarding the role of the guardian in the age assessment process may be found in

the FRA Guardianship for children deprived of parental care handbook

(

), which contains the following.

Possible actions by the guardian in relation to age assessment:

▪

check that there is legitimate reason for the age assessment and request that children who are

clearly underage not be subjected to such assessment;

▪

ensure that the child receives all relevant information about the age assessment procedure,

including clear information about its purpose and the process and possible consequences — the

information should be provided in a child-friendly manner and in a language the child understands;

▪

ensure that the age assessment is conducted with the informed consent of the child and of their

guardian;

▪

check that independent professionals with appropriate expertise who are familiar with the child’s

ethnic and cultural background undertake the age assessment and conduct it in a safe, child- and

gender-sensitive manner with due respect for the child’s dignity;

▪

if doubt remains about the child’s age after the age assessment is completed, insist that a person

be considered a child;

▪

ensure that the outcome of the procedure is explained to the child in a child-friendly manner and

in a language he or she understands.

▪

request that the results of the assessment procedure be shared with the guardian and include these

in the child’s file;

▪

review with the child the possibility of an appeal against the age assessment decision, in accordance

with national legislation;

▪

with the child’s agreement, be present during the age assessment procedure.

Examples from pracce

DK — In cases of unaccompanied children, delays in the appointment of the guardian may derive from age

disputes. This can occur when it is necessary to complete age assessment procedures before a guardian

is appointed. To overcome this delay, the Danish Red Cross is the designated organisation to appoint an

observer, called ‘bisidder’.

UK — The Scottish Guardianship Service (set up on a non-statutory basis) works with children and young

people who arrive in Scotland unaccompanied and separated from their families. It supports and works

with young people under 18 years of age who are seeking asylum or have been trafficked from outside

the EU. It also works with anyone who is being treated as a child under 18 but whose age is disputed and is

undergoing age assessment. Children and young people are allocated a guardian to help them understand,

participate in and navigate the complex immigration, legal and welfare processes.

Right to informaon

Prior to the examination of the application for international protection, the child must receive all the

relevant information in a child-friendly manner and in a language which he or she is able to understand.

The child’s understanding of the information must be ensured before proceeding with the assessment.

Such information should be provided free of charge and the questions of the applicant or the guardian/

representative should be attended to. It is crucial to ensure the applicant understands the process, the

objective and the consequences (e.g. he or she can explain it with his or her own words). Some applicants

might not dare to ask questions due to their age, cultural background or psychological state. The use of

child-friendly materials or materials adjusted to the specific needs of the person may be of assistance

in helping the applicant to understand the process; however, in practice, the skills and empathic and

(

) The handbook is available at http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra-2014-guardianship-children_en_0.pdf�

28 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards

supportive attitude of the person providing the information are of utmost importance for a successful

outcome. Information must be provided systematically during the process and evidence of this provision

of information should be documented (when it was provided, by whom, etc.). The information should

cover at least the following content:

▪

there are doubts regarding the age and the reasons for these doubts;

▪

the possibility that the age may be estimated by an age assessment which may include a medical

examination if the applicant provides consent;

▪

information on the method and on the process (what the methods being used are, why these

specific methods are preferred, the accuracy and intrusiveness of the method, the impact that

the specific method may have, etc.);

▪

doubts and concerns must be addressed, the systematic provision of information and a good

understanding of the process and its purposes are essential to ease the consent gathering;

▪

the rights and obligations attached to the process (consequences must not be too detrimental

otherwise they would bias the consent of the applicant);

▪

the right to refusal to undergo medical examination and its consequences;

▪

the possibility to challenge the results of the age assessment;

▪

the next steps to follow.

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

The majority of the respondents (15 EU+ states) provide informaon on all of the methods used in the

age assessment process, while nine EU+ states provide informaon only when applying medical methods.

22 EU+ states provide the informaon to the applicant in a language that they understand or are supposed

to understand.

One EU+ state only informs about the results when the applicant is assessed to be older than the claim.

One EU+ state ensures that the formal decision is explained by social workers.

Further informaon can be found in Annex 4 to this publicaon.

Right to express their views and to be heard

As stated in the CRC (Article 12) and analysed in the UN committee’s General Comment No 12, the right

to be heard applies to every child capable of forming his or her own views. The provision of information

and support is decisive in contributing to the development of the child’s capacity to form their own views.

After the information has been provided and understood by the applicant, his or her views should be gathered

and taken into consideration on all matters affecting him or her, according to his or her level of maturity.

This right requires a systematic application throughout the procedure and at least in the following moments.

▪

Views should be gathered whenever the authorities have doubts regarding the statements or

the evidence provided by the applicant. A simple attempt to exchange views and explain in a

constructive manner the reasons why the claimed age is not accepted or why the information is

not enough may help the applicant to understand the process and increase their willingness to

cooperate.

▪

In cases where there are possible inconsistencies in the age of the applicant, he or she must be

given the opportunity and time to explain them either orally or in writing.

▪

Sometimes the applicant will be able to substantiate the claimed age through the provision of

additional documentation, proof or credible explanations. In such cases these explanations and

conditions would render the age assessment unnecessary.

The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 29

▪

In cases where the applicant refuses to undergo a medical examination, the reasons must be

explored and therefore the applicant should also be heard. Sometimes this reluctance can be

overcome with more information or by adjusting the process to his or her needs, such as by selecting

an alternative method.

▪

As the consequences of the identification as an adult or as a child are far-reaching, the applicant

should be given the opportunity to challenge the results in a prompt and accessible way if once

finalised the results from the age assessment differ from the claimed age.

▪

The continuous involvement and participation in the process help to reduce feelings of uncertainty

and distress and to build trust between the applicant and the authorities of the host EU+ states.

Children being interviewed are often distressed about the possibility of being perceived as ‘liars’.

Moreover, they may be in a post-traumatic situation. The presence of the representative is key to

ensuring that the views of the applicant are heard and taken into account according to his or her

level of maturity, and the child will therefore have been assisted in making an informed decision

to undergo the examinations through the specific method in use.

Since encouraging the child to be forthcoming with the disclosure of information on his or her age is crucial

in establishing the need to undertake age assessment, the officials interacting directly with the child should

be trained in the use of child-friendly interviewing techniques. Likewise, they should have the necessary

background information and expertise (including on the child-specific context) regarding the country of

origin of the child (

) required to properly assess the information on the age provided by the child. Where

possible, the interpreter should also be familiar with interviewing children.

Informed consent and right of refusal

Informed consent refers to a free, voluntary and informed decision. According to Article 25(5) APD recast,

applicants and/or their representatives must provide consent for the medical examination. Even though

consent is not a legal requirement, seeking consent to the age assessment is always encouraged when using

non-medical methods. It can be obtained through the systematic and effective provision of information

and a good understanding of the process and of its purposes.

Informed consent should be obtained from the applicant and/or their representative prior to undertaking

the age assessment and after all the relevant information has been given to allow the applicant to make

an informed decision. In particular, the potential impact of the medical examination, the right of refusal

and the consequences of refusal on the part of the applicant to undergo medical examination should be

explained and well understood.

As mentioned before, the applicant has the right to refuse to undergo any medical examinations. In some

cases, reluctance to undergo them may be overcome by providing more information or by adjusting the

process to his or her needs, sometimes by selecting an alternative method. The fact that an applicant

has refused to undergo such an examination should not prevent the determining authority from taking a

decision on the application for international protection (Article 25.5 APD). Furthermore, the application

for international protection should not be rejected solely on the basis of the refusal to undergo medical

examinations. No automatic assumptions or consequences should result from such a refusal. Furthermore,

in cases of refusal, the applicant should not be automatically considered an adult, but the reasons should be

explored, his or her situation should be assessed on a case-by-case basis and the consequences of refusal

should not be so disproportionately adverse as to bias the applicant towards consent. If the applicant

decides not to undertake age assessment without any justification for the refusal, the assessment must

continue when possible with the elements at the authorities’ disposal.

(

) EASO gathers and develops country of origin information available on their website: https://www.easo.europa.eu/information-analysis/country-origin-

information/country-reports�

30 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

• 11 EU+ states obtain the informed consent of the applicant regardless of the age assessment method.

•

EU+ states only seek consent of the applicant if medical methods will be used.

• Four EU+ states do not request consent for any method (two of them do not request consent since

they do not use medical methods either).

•

the other hand, six EU+ states request consent from the representave in all cases.

• Seven EU+ states would request the consent of the representave only if medical examinaons were

to be used.

•

e EU+ state requests consent from the representave if the applicant appears to be under 14

ars

of age.

•

ve EU+ states do not require consent from the representave in any case.

•

EU+ states give the applicant the possibility to refuse the age assessment regardless of the method.

• Seven EU+ states give this possibility, but it is limited to medical examinaons.

•

ree EU+ states do not recognise this possibility.

•

ncerning the consequences of a refusal to undergo a medical age assessment:

•

EU+ states would not automacally consider the applicant an adult;

•

x EU+ states would consider the applicant an adult if there was no juscaon for the refusal, or

any addional indicaon that the applicant is a child;

•

x EU+ states would automacally consider the applicant an adult if she or he refuses to undergo

age assessment.

• Wh

en deciding on the applicaon for internaonal protecon, seven EU+ states would not take the

refusal into account while 14 EU+ states will take the refusal into account.

•

e EU+ state claried that they will take the refusal into account only if the minority is relevant to

the substance of the claim (child-specic grounds for persecuon or serious harm).

Further informaon can be found in Annex

4 t

o this publicaon.

Condenality principle and data protecon for safety consideraons

Confidentiality refers to the treatment of information. When information is provided in confidence and

is, therefore, confidential, it can only be shared with the consent of the subject of the information, or to

authorised parties if allowed for in national law. The shared information is limited in scope only to the

information necessary for these parties in order to carry out their functions. If not allowed for in the law,

the holder of the information will need the owner’s consent to share the information with another party.

Before sensitive information is disclosed, the consent of the child to share the information must be sought

in an age-appropriate manner. All those involved in the age assessment process should understand and

be bound by the requirements of data protection. Further to this, informed consent should be obtained

from the individual before their information is further shared. Information must also only be gathered and

used for the purposes of age assessment.

The principle of confidentiality is intrinsically linked with safety considerations. Safety and confidentiality

guarantees must be put in place as important safeguards in the age assessment process. This is especially

so when referring to unaccompanied children who may be in need of international protection.

This consideration takes on additional weight when seeking information in the country of origin of a child

who is an applicant for international protection.

If the applicant does not have documentation to prove the age, and the statements are not considered

sufficient to prove it, authorities should try to be proactive in seeking this information through other means.

The variety of means that could be employed is broad, such as any national or EU+ states’ databases, family

members that could have additional documentation or embassies of other countries.

The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 31

Nevertheless, as underlined in the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child’s General Comment No 6 (

in conducting the age assessment no reference should be made to the status of the child as an asylum-

seeker or refugee (para.

). The safety of the family members of the child remaining in the country of

origin may be endangered if the principle of confidentiality is not observed; the child may become a refugee

sur place (para.

), meaning that if the child is asking for international protection, the disclosure of this

information to the authorities of the country of origin might imply that the applicant can be persecuted

or could suffer serious harm upon return.

The adverse consequences of a breach of the principle of confidentiality with regard to information

collected within the international protection procedure, including information collected for age assessment

purposes, may seriously affect not only the particular child and his or her family, but also the integrity of

the asylum system�

Qualied professionals experienced with children

All those who work with and for children should receive appropriate initial and ongoing training concerning

the rights and needs of children. Within their field of expertise they should demonstrate proficiency when

using it for the specific purpose of age assessment or be trained to do it.

The least intrusive method

As acknowledged in the APD recast, age assessment should be conducted through the least invasive

examination relative to the required level of certainty. It should be performed in full respect of the

individual’s dignity.

The term invasive is commonly used in medical procedures to indicate the introduction of instruments or

other objects into the body or body cavities. This also includes the cutting of tissues. This term can be used

as a synonym of intrusiveness, but both terms can be seen as being interchangeable in this context. As the

negative effects of the age assessment methods do not always imply the mentioned physical effects but

the intrusion of one’s privacy, the preferred term is intrusiveness owing to its broader spectrum.

The level of intrusiveness may be considered to depend on the impact of the method on one’s privacy

(thorough interview), which is different from the impact on one’s physical health (e.g. ionisation) or on

one’s psychological health (e.g. recalling traumatising events). These individual considerations make it

very difficult to reach a consensus on which methods are more intrusive than others and therefore to

objectively score them as such. For this reason, intrusiveness should be assessed on a case-by-case basis,

depending on the circumstances of the specific applicant. For example, for some applicants with past

traumatic experiences, a wrist X-ray may not be perceived as being psychologically intrusive, while an

interview with a strong psychological element, such as recollecting past events, could be distressful for

them. In other cases, the use of a particular coil to undertake a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be

claustrophobic and therefore inappropriate for some applicants.

For this reason, the selection of the least intrusive method and an age assessment process that caters

for the needs of the specific applicant remains a challenge for the authorities. However, Article 25(5) APD

recast provides useful guidance on this specific point.

‘Member States may use medical examinations to determine the age of unaccompanied minors

[…], where following general statements or other relevant indications, Member States have doubts

concerning the applicant’s age.’ (Article 25.5 APD recast)

(

) UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No 6 (2005) on the treatment of unaccompanied and separated children outside their country

of origin�

32 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards

1. General

statements,

if doubts

2. Other relevant

indicaons,

(databases),

if doubts

3. Medical

examinaons

As a result, authorities must first examine any existing evidence, including statements and relevant

indications, before deciding whether it is necessary to undertake further assessment.

Therefore, authorities are compelled to take a proactive approach to gathering and analysing all the

existing evidence at their disposal. This includes not only the person’s documents but also information

from other family members who may have information and proof of age of the person (e.g. an older sibling

with documentation proving his or her age), other databases, etc. This information should be gathered

under the condition that the applicant or his or her family are not put at risk. When gathering this kind

of information, authorities are not conducting an age assessment; it is instead considered to be a regular

analysis of evidence by the asylum or migration authorities as part of their work.

When the available documentation or evidence does not directly provide information on the age, a deeper

analysis or investigation is required, after which a further analysis of evidence is needed. This exercise

would be considered an age assessment method different from the regular information-gathering one

referred to in the previous paragraph. This method, together with others, is explored in more detail in

Chapter

where the advantages and limitations of each individual method are analysed.

Some of the medical methods used for age assessment purposes involve the use of radiation (carpal, collar-

bone, pelvic or dental X-rays). The use of these methods carries the risk of potentially harmful effects that

radiation may have on the health of the applicant. For this reason, less intrusive methods (non-medical)

should be used first and, if it appears necessary to resort to medical methods, radiation-free methods

must be prioritised over ones that involve the use of radiation. The following image provides a visual guide

to how methods should be prioritised.

The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 33

Prioritisation of age assessment methods

Non-medical methods

• Further assessment of evidence.

• Age assessment interview.

• Psychological assessment.

Medical method — Radiaon free

• Dental observaon.

• MRI

• Physical development.

Medical method — Radiaon (as low as

reasonably achievable)

• Carpal X-Ray.

• Collar bone X-Ray.

• Dental X-Ray.

The use of methods involving radiation should be deemed necessary only as a last resort. If these

methods need to be used, all the cautions and measures required to prevent the risk of suffering

any possible negative effects must be adopted. The dose of radiation exposure for the applicant

varies in practice depending on the area of exposure, the equipment and national legislation. In this

regard, the application of the as-low-as-reasonably achievable (ALARA) principle is crucial. ALARA

is a radiation safety principle based on the minimisation of radiation doses and the limitation of the

release of radioactive materials into the environment by employing all ‘reasonable methods’. ALARA

is not only a sound radiation safety principle, but it is also a regulatory requirement for all radiation

protection programmes. Time, distance and shielding are the three major factors that are used to

keep radiation doses ALARA:

�

me: limiting the time of radiation exposure will reduce the radiation dose.

2�

stance: increasing the distance between the examinee and the radiation source will reduce

exposure by the square of the distance. Doubling the distance between the body and the

radiation source will divide the radiation exposure by a factor of four.

�

ielding: there are various types of shielding used in the reduction of radiation exposure,

including lead aprons, mobile lead shields, lead glasses and lead barriers; when working in high-

radiation areas it is important to use shielding whenever possible.

Another important consideration that needs to be taken into account on the issue of intrusiveness relates

not only to the method chosen but on how the examinations are being conducted.

▪

Examinations should never be forced or culturally inappropriate; professionals should be

qualified and trained in gender- and culturally sensitive issues.

▪

Internal guidelines on how to conduct the examination should reflect the necessary measures

to guarantee the preferred gender of the examiner and interpreter, if needed, or to reduce the

number of examiners present to two persons in order to make the scenario less intimidating

for the applicant.

34 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards

▪

The premises where the method/practices are performed shall have the appropriate conditions

to ensure maximum privacy, with respect to the principle of confidentiality and the rights of the

child, including child safeguarding.

▪

Examinations involving nudity, observation or anthropometric measurements of genitalia or

intimate parts should be precluded since they are highly intrusive; this is particularly so for

persons with a different background and for persons who may have suffered episodes of abuse.

For this reason, no method requiring nudity or the observation or examination of genitalia as the

sexual maturity observation should be applied for the purpose of age assessment.

Example from pracce

FR — According to the law of 14

rch 2016 on the protection of the child, the use of X-rays is now

restricted and the sexual maturity observation is explicitly prohibited as a method to assess the age of

persons declaring to be under 18.

UK — Immigration officials at the border are permitted to make an initial assessment when an

unaccompanied young person is first encountered based on the individual’s own statement, any

documents available and the immigration official’s physical appearance and demeanour assessment in

person. This is not binding as it can be disputed or challenged by the individual. In addition, the immigration

official may request further clarification of the view formed of the individual’s age. In both these situations,

if there is a challenge from the individual or a concern by the immigration official that the individual is

under 18, then the principle of benefit of the doubt is applied and the individual is treated as a child. This

means that they will be transferred to the children’s services department of a local authority which will

then be asked to conduct an age assessment. The means by which the local authority does this are not

set out in legislation, but the practice has developed of using two social workers to assess the individual

and to come to a determination based on that assessment. They will use their training and experience

of working with young people to come to a conclusion.

CY — The relevant procedure uses a holistic approach and includes medical and non-medical examinations.

Non-medical examinations:

1. documents submitted by the applicant;

2. note from the district welfare services’ office;

3. age assessment interviews conducted by the asylum service.

If the asylum service, having exhausted all non-medical examinations (1-3), still continues to question

the applicant’s age, it may use medical examinations for determining the applicant’s age as provided in

Article 10(1)(G) of the national refugee laws.

All medical examinations are conducted in the presence of an interpreter and of the minor’s guardian.

Accuracy and margin of error

The term accuracy is defined as the ‘quality or state of being correct or precise’. This is a fundamental issue

regarding the age assessment process. As yet, there is no age assessment method that can provide accurate

results on the chronological age of the person. The current methods can only offer an estimate of the age,

thus the expressions ‘age assessment’ or ‘age estimation’ should be preferred over ‘age determination’. As all

methods have a margin of error, this aspect should always be documented, especially in the case of inconclusive

results. As not all methods can estimate all the ranges of ages, the selection of the method should depend

on the range of ages in question (some are more accurate in certain age segments than others). The gender

of the applicant being subjected to the assessment is another factor that should be taken into consideration

since the method may have a different margin of error depending on the gender of the examinee (

)�

(

) Tscholl, P.M, Junge, A., Dvorak, J. and Zubler, V., ‘MRI of the wrist is not recommended for age determination in female football players of U-16/U-17

competitions’, Scand J Med Sci Sports, 2015, doi:10.1111/sms.12461.

The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 35

In accordance with the guidelines proposed by Ritz-Timme et al. (

), for an age assessment method to

be considered acceptable, it must fulfil the following requirements:

e method must be transparent and provable and presented to the scientific community as a rule

by publication in peer-reviewed journals;

ear information concerning the accuracy of the method for age assessment should be available;

e method needs to be sufficiently accurate to solve any underlying questions and fulfil the specific

demands of the specific case;

in cases of age assessment in living individuals, principles of medical ethics and legal regulations have

to be considered, especially if medical intervention is involved.

According to Schmeling et al. 2011 (

), to be considered accurate, any reference material used must

fulfil certain requirements (Solari, A.

and Ambramovitch, K., ‘The accuracy and precision of third molar

development as an indicator of chronological age in Hispanics’, Journal of Forensic Sciences, (2002), Vol.

pp.

1-535):

▪

adequate sample size,

▪

verified ages of test persons,

▪

uniform age distribution,

▪

separation by gender,

▪

details of date of examination,

▪

clear definition of characteristics studied,

▪

exact description of methodology,

▪

details on reference population relative to genetic-geographic origin,

▪

socioeconomic status,

▪

state of health,

▪

details of group size, mean or median value and a measure of variation for each characteristics

studied.

The assessment’s margin of error should be documented and included in the report in a reader-friendly

manner. This is to ensure a correct interpretation of the results and understanding by other professionals

who have no medical expertise, such as law enforcement officials, judges, prosecutors, guardians/

representatives or asylum and migration officials.

DE — If conclusive results are not obtained after the first examination, benefit of the doubt should

still be given and other age assessment methods gradually used as part of the process. In this way, the

decision would be based on a wider range of evidence, rendering it reliable. The federal states (Länder)

are responsible for the age determination of unaccompanied children which takes place at the time of

their being ‘taken into care’ (Inobhutnahme) as soon as they get into contact with a German authority.

Their respective decision is also the basis for the asylum procedure.

In the preamble to the law changing the social code in 2015, reference is made to the recommendations of

the Working Group of the Federal Youth Welfare Services (Bundesarbeitsgemeinschaft landesjugendämter;

http://www.bagljae.de/downloads/118_handlungsempfehlungen-umf_2014.pdf)

�

Thus Section 42 of the social code provides the basis for the age determination process, which introduces

a gradual procedure. The Working Group of the Federal Youth Welfare Services advises to consult

(

) Ritz-Timme, S., Cattaneo, C., Collins, M.J. et al., ‘Age estimation: the state of the art in relation to the specific demands of forensic practice’, Int J Legal Med,

2000, 113(3), pp. 129-136.

(

) Schmeling, A., Garamendi, P. M., Prieto, J. L. and Landa, M. I., ‘Forensic age estimation in unaccompanied minors and young living adults’, Forensic medicine

— From old problems to new challenges, Vieira, D. N. (ed.), InTech, (2001), available at https://www.intechopen.com/books/forensic-medicine-from-old-

problems-to-new-challenges/forensic-age-estimation-in-unaccompanied-minors-and-young-living-adult

36 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards

the recommendations of the Group on Forensic Age Diagnostic (Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Forensische

Altersdiagnostik, AGFAD; http://campus.uni-muenster.de/fileadmin/einrichtung/agfad/empfehlungen/

empfehlungen_ausserhalb_strafverfahren.pdf) for the age determination process.

NO — A new method for reading stage results of X-ray images of hands and wisdom teeth has been

developed by the Forensic Department at Oslo University Hospital. It consists of a statistic model combining

data from two radiological methods: Demirjian’s staging of the third molar and Greulich and Pyle’s atlas

of the hand and wrist. In total, this includes over 14 000 individuals (both genders). The statistical model

is based on fitting a transition model on several datasets combined/pooled (for each gender) and Bayes

Theorem is used to obtain the distributions of the chronological ages given the stages. The results are

presented as 95

% a

nd 75

% pr

ediction intervals and as a percentage of cases under the age of 18 and

under the age of 16. Due to large biological variations that go beyond what is contained in the reference

material, the results cannot be totally conclusive. However, clear results could be given relatively high

weight in the overall assessment. Oslo University Hospital has recently published a comprehensive manual

for this method of age assessment (called BioAlder).

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

In the case of inconclusive results of the age assessment process, 16 EU+ states apply benet of doubt,

while six EU+ states do not apply it and will consider only the available evidence or informaon.

Further informaon can be found in Annex

4 t

o this publicaon.

Combining intrusiveness and accuracy

Methods should be selected after taking into consideration their intrusiveness and accuracy. Methods

that are less intrusive and more accurate should be given first preference, while methods that are less

intrusive but also less accurate should be chosen last. The assessment should be stopped at the point where

a method becomes highly intrusive, regardless of its potential accuracy. While nudity or the exhibition of

genitalia is extremely stressful for all persons, it is even more traumatic for children who may have been

subjected to abuse as part of persecution in their country of origin or during their migration. The high level

of intrusiveness and the increased risk of traumatisation as a result of using these methods render these

examinations unacceptable for age assessment purposes.

The best interests of the child and procedural safeguards EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 37

Considering intrusiveness and accuracy

High

Intrusiveness axis

Accuracy axis

Low

Non-acceptable

Highly instrusive

Low accuracy

Non-

recommendable

Highly intrusive

Highly accurate

Non-

recomendable

Low accuracy

Low

intrusiveness

Recommended

Low

intrusiveness

Highly accurate

Right to eecve remedy

In the event of a negative decision (discordant with the claimed age), the authorities should explain the

reasons for the decision and inform the applicant about how it can be challenged. As the childhood/

adulthood of the applicant may influence how the international protection procedure is conducted

(prioritisation, safeguards, etc.), a decision on the age assessment should be issued separately from and

prior to the decision on international protection. If there is no separate right to appeal against the result

of the age assessment decision itself, the opportunity to challenge the outcome through judicial review

or as part of the consideration of the overall protection claim should be available. The individual should

have access to a representative or to legal support to assist him or her in the process. When issuing the

separate decision, the information on how to challenge it should be provided free of charge and according

to the level of understanding of the applicant. The applicant should have the opportunity to have his or

her views heard at this point.

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

Concerning the legal remedies available to the applicant against a decision on age assessment:

•

ght EU+ states oer the possibility to challenge the age assessment decision separately;

• nine EU+ states oer the possibility to challenge the age assessment decision as part of the IP decision

or at the same me;

•

two EU+ states do not oer legal remedies to the applicant against age assessment results.

Further informaon can be found in Annex 4 t

o this publicaon.

38 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion The age assessment process: implemenng a muldisciplinary and holisc approach

Chapter 3 The age assessment process:

implemenng a muldisciplinary and holisc

approach

Implemenng a holisc and muldisciplinary approach to the age

assessment process

A holistic approach takes into consideration the whole of something or the total system, instead of just

its parts. Unlike a simple age assessment in which the estimation of the chronological age is the main

objective, an age assessment process based on a ‘holistic’ approach does not focus exclusively on age but

takes a broader spectrum of factors into consideration. Using this approach, the needs of children and

young people in the migration context are also taken into consideration when assessing the chronological

age. Therefore, a holistic age assessment leaves room for flexibility and the individualisation of the age

assessment process, allowing the assessment process to be based on the specific circumstances and the

needs of the applicant (for example, whether to undertake the age assessment or not, influencing the

selection of the methods, the examiners, etc.).

As a result, a holistically designed age assessment reinforces the operationalisation of the BIC throughout

the process. The systematic and continuous observation of the BIC should be reflected in all the actions

that affect them. Therefore, every age assessment process should primarily consider how to implement the

principle for the proper and prioritised identification of the child (in particular in cases of unaccompanied

children). Some measures need to be adopted to have the full picture of the child’s needs, for example:

• those in contact with the child (including teachers, caretakers, guardians/representatives, health

professionals, reception authorities, asylum and migration authorities and law enforcement) should

take a proactive approach to gather all the information necessary to identify aspects of concern or

interest (such as history of abuse or traumatic experiences) — throughout the process children should

be heard not just on the topic of their age but also on their needs and concerns;

•

order to minimise the number of interviews and avoid repetitive questions, this information should

be made available to other relevant actors (guardians/representatives, health professionals, reception

authorities, asylum and migration authorities and law enforcement) throughout the process, when

possible and respecting data protection rules;

•

add

itionally, those professionals shall have the opportunity to express their opinion based on their

expertise and experience and to exchange their views when necessary;

•

e process to be in place should be elaborated in consultation with all relevant stakeholders — on

this point, the holistic approach will connect with the multidisciplinary approach as follows.

A multidisciplinary approach combines or involves several academic disciplines or professional specialisations

in an approach to a topic or problem.

A multidisciplinary approach for the purpose of age assessment would imply the exploration of

different aspects or factors such as physical, psychological, developmental, environmental and cultural

ones

(

). Likewise, an age assessment process based solely on medical methods cannot be considered

multidisciplinary. As there is no single method that can tell the age of a person with certainty, multiple

factors must be assessed through the use of different methods. This ensures that the decision is based

on a wider range of evidence, therefore improving the reliability of the assessment. In this regard, a

multidisciplinary assessment requires that professionals who are appropriately qualified in age estimation

in their respective field of expertise are involved throughout the process, during the examinations and

(

) See, for instance, separated children in Europe programme, Statement of good practice, (2009), available at http://www.scepnetwork.org/p/1/69

The age assessment process: implemenng a muldisciplinary and holisc approach EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 39

when taking the decision after the results from the different examinations have been issued. Depending

on the method, this may include social workers, doctors, radiologists, (child) psychologists, paediatricians

or other suitably skilled individuals with expertise in the field of child development and age estimation.

In order to coordinate the input from the different experts, a coordination mechanism should be in place

during the practical implementation of a multidisciplinary approach.

As with all matters concerning the examination of the application for international protection and in

accordance with Article 4 QD recast, all available evidence should be taken into consideration. The decision

on which professionals should be part of the assessment should be taken with the aim of increasing the

overall accuracy of the assessment as much as possible while maintaining the least possible intrusive effect

on the applicant.

In deciding which methods to select when undertaking age assessment, the BIC should be a primary

consideration. The APD recast specifies that if, following general statements or other relevant indications,

Member States have doubts concerning the applicant’s age, they may use medical examinations within

the framework of the examination of an application for international protection to determine the age of

unaccompanied children. As psychological development and the maturity of the applicant are essential

aspects to be explored during the process, a psychosocial assessment should be selected before other

methods.

If after a multidisciplinary assessment a Member State is still in doubt concerning the applicant’s age, they

should assume that the applicant is a child.

According to the IOM

(

), there are currently three main approaches to the assessment of age:

▪

the first, which can best be described as non-medical, incorporates an evaluation of existing

documentation, a visual assessment based on physical appearance and interviews that provide a

narrative about an individual’s life and circumstances;

▪

the second is essentially medical and includes physical examination and imaging of bones and/or

teeth by radiography;

▪

the third seeks to integrate the data from both non-medical and medical approaches, recognising

that multidisciplinary collaboration is a prerequisite to ensure good outcomes for vulnerable

children and young people.

(

) EASO Working Group on Age Assessment, September 2016.

40 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion The age assessment process: implemenng a muldisciplinary and holisc approach

Flow chart of the age assessment process

The process, as described in the previous section, together with the necessary steps and safeguards

required to ensure an effective and safe age assessment, is visually represented in the following flow chart.

Applicaon

Safeguards in place

• Idenﬁcaon of special needs (vulnerability assessment)

• Analysis of evidence

• Rest and recovery period and BIA

Non-medical methods

• Further assessment of evidence.

• Age assessment interview.

• Psychological assessment.

Consent

Medical method — radiaon free

• Dental observaon.

• MRI

• Physical developments.

Medical Method - Radiaon

(as low as reasonably achievable):

• Carpal Z-Ray.

• Collar bone X-Ray.

• Dental X-Ray.

• Beneﬁt of the doubt applies.

• Best interests of the child is

implemented.

• Immediate appointment of the

guardian/representave.

• Informaon provision in simple

terms to the applicant and the

guardian/representave and

clariﬁcaon of quesons.

• The views of the child are

heard.

• Qualiﬁed and experienced

professionals.

Inial assessment

Age assessment process based on BIA

When consent is not obtained:

• explore the reasons;

• hear the views of the child.

Refusal to

undergo

assessment

Informed

consent is

obtained

Consent is subjected

to adjustments in

the process

Selecng a method

Selecon of least invasive and more accurate method/s

depending on the speciﬁc circumstances and needs of the

applicant.

BIA recommendaons are taken into consideraon.

Gradual implementaon of the methods in the process

Noﬁcaon

The outcome of the age assessment is explained to the

applicant and the guardian/representave.

Results are subject to challenge and the informaon on

how to challenge them is given.

Results are conclusive when:

• they were agreed by two experts (when only one

method was required) or by a muldisciplinary panel

of experts (when several methods were required);

• the margin of error of the ﬁnal results is documented;

• the lowest age of the margin is established as ﬁnal.

The age assessment process: implemenng a muldisciplinary and holisc approach EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 41

Guidance on the age assessment process

When considering whether age assessment is necessary or not

Certain preconditions and safeguards should be in place prior to deciding on the process or before

conducting any age assessment.

▪

The applicant has made an application for international protection and personal details such

as the identity, age and family links are recorded.

▪

The applicant’s claimed age (as an adult or as a child) is not supported by documents and any

other evidence to probe the claimed age has not been provided.

▪

The applicant’s claimed age is doubted�

▪

The applicant could be provisionally fingerprinted if the questioned range of age is clearly above

the age stipulated for that purpose in EU and/or national law and included in the EU asylum

fingerprint database (Eurodac)

(

)�

▪

In applying benefit of the doubt, the applicant shall be considered to be below 18 years and, if

unaccompanied, a guardian/representative shall be immediately appointed.

▪

The BIC shall be observed from this point onwards until conclusive results point out that the

applicant is an adult.

The age of a person is a factor that may render him or her vulnerable (child, elderly) or may further

stress other pre-existing vulnerabilities (derived from gender, family circumstances, sexual orientation,

gender identity, disability, serious illness or having been subjected to torture or other serious forms of

violence). Considering that these vulnerabilities may adversely affect the applicant’s ability to present

and substantiate their application for international protection, the EU asylum acquis upholds additional

safeguards to provide fair asylum procedures to applicants with special needs. To ensure that applicants

with special needs can fully present and substantiate their application, an early identification mechanism

and, when required, a later vulnerability assessment must be in place. However, authorities must remain

vigilant to quickly identify signs of vulnerability that may appear at later stages of the procedure and react

accordingly. This mechanism must be available throughout the procedure to ensure that later identification

is possible and therefore adequate support is provided without undue delay.

The specific needs of the vulnerable applicant should play a key role when deciding what methods should

be used, how the assessment should be conducted and whether it would have negative effects on this

specific applicant. Some of the information collected when assessing the special needs may be used when

assessing the age. By doing so, delays and the duplication of procedures on the same person are avoided.

When conducted, following a holistic and multidisciplinary approach, the age assessment might also help

to identify other needs and vulnerabilities that were not detected in previous vulnerability assessments.

At this stage, if the claimed age cannot be verified, and after ensuring that an investigation will not endanger

the applicant or his or her family, officials should proactively seek information from other sources. During

this preliminary step, known as analysis of evidence, all the evidence at the disposal of the authorities

(documents, statements of the applicant and his or her family members about his or her age and identity,

statements of the guardian, information present in other databases, and first estimations based on physical

appearance) is taken into account. When dealing with asylum-seeking children, especially unaccompanied

children, officials are expected to adopt a particularly proactive and empathetic attitude.

Based on the results from the aforementioned analysis, the responsible authorities would be able to

distinguish between cases where the claimed age is in doubt and those where it is not.

The application of benefit of the doubt should be triggered as soon as there are any doubts on the claimed

age. Therefore, the applicant should be considered a child until conclusive results are obtained through

further examinations.

(

) Currently the Eurodac regulation provides for fingerprinting of all persons above 14 years old; in the proposal for a recast the proposed ages is lowered to

6 years old.

42 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion The age assessment process: implemenng a muldisciplinary and holisc approach

Since the applicant is considered to be a child, the guardian/representative should be immediately

appointed in order to ensure the principle of the BIC is observed in all of the decisions affecting the child.

This includes determining the necessity of an age assessment.

Although the main objective of an age assessment is to assess the level of maturity of the applicant and

needs to take all factors relevant to the assessment into consideration, the well-being of the child must also

be taken into consideration. For this reason, it is important to ensure a rest and recovery period between

the first analysis of evidence, which may be conducted upon arrival, and a fully fledged age assessment.

Thus, a two-stage age assessment process is deemed to be the most appropriate channel to conduct an

efficient and safe age assessment. This is especially so in the context of high influx, where the need to have

an efficient identification and registration process is paramount.

A rest and recovery period can facilitate the building of trust between the child and their guardian/

representative. It also allows for the child to begin to feel safe and to share the information necessary to

assess his or her needs. During this period, a BIA

(

) should be conducted to ensure that the particular

age assessment process considered is compatible with the individual circumstances of the applicant and

that the expected outcome is beneficial to the process and not harmful to the child.

The process should ensure that the child’s views are systematically heard through his or her own account or

relayed through their guardian/representative. This right requires a systematic application, not just throughout

the procedure but also at the earliest stage before the decision to undertake the assessment is made.

▪

Views should be gathered whenever the authorities have doubts regarding the statements or

other evidence provided by the applicant. A simple attempt at exchanging views and explaining

in a constructive manner the reasons why the claimed age is not accepted or why the information

is not enough to confirm the statements may help the applicant to understand the process and

to be willing to cooperate.

▪

In case of possible inconsistencies regarding his or her age, the applicant must be given the

opportunity and time to explain them either orally or in writing.

▪

Sometimes the applicant will provide additional documentation or other evidence or credible

explanations and be able to substantiate the claimed age. Therefore, these explanations and

additional elements would make the age assessment unnecessary.

After assessing all of the evidence, concluding that the doubts on the applicant’s age have been substantiated,

hearing the views of the applicant and completing the BIA form, the decision whether or not to initiate the

age assessment process can be taken.

When conducng age assessment

If age assessment is deemed to be necessary and is recommended by the BIA, the age assessment process

shall be initiated without undue delay. Authorities need to ensure that the applicant and the guardian/

representative have been provided with relevant information that has been expressed in simple terms

and that the information has been understood. Any questions that the applicant and/or their guardian/

representative may have must be answered and any clarifications needed should be provided.

Following this, the applicant and/or their guardian/representative will be better equipped to give informed

consent to the process. In cases where the applicant cannot give consent due to a justified impediment, the

guardian/representative’s informed consent will be sufficient. If there are reservations about the process,

they must be clarified at any stage. The refusal to undergo the assessment should not imply an automatic

consideration of age of majority. In such cases, the applicant should be heard again and the reasons should be

fully explored. Reluctance may be overcome by providing the applicant and/or their guardian/representative

with more information or by adjusting the process to his or her needs, such as by selecting an alternative method.

At any rate, a refusal to undergo age assessment cannot be the sole reason for rejecting an application

(Article 25(5) APD).

(

) See, for instance, separated children in Europe programme, Position paper on age assessment in the context of separated children in Europe, (2012),

available at http://www. scepnetwork.org/images/16/163.pdf

The age assessment process: implemenng a muldisciplinary and holisc approach EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 43

Once informed consent is obtained, the process, with all the necessary safeguards, should be made

available and, if needed, further adapted to the child’s special needs or circumstances in line with national

practice and in compliance with the EU legal acquis

�

e selection of methods should be as individualised as possible, and the least intrusive and most

accurate method should be given preference. When deciding which method is the least intrusive option,

consideration should be given not only to the physical impact on the applicant but also to the psychological

effect on the applicant (see Article 25(5), second paragraph, APD). Environmental and cultural factors also

need to be taken into account.

Examinations should be implemented gradually, and first preference should be given to non-medical

methods. If these do not yield conclusive results, medical methods which do not require the use of

radiation can be utilised. The use of medical methods which do require the use of radiation should be the

very last option and, as discussed above, should be the one that requires the use of the lowest dose of

radiation possible. The results from tests assessing the psychological maturity should be given at least the

same weight as the results from those assessing physical development. This approach ensures that once

conclusive results are obtained from one method, any additional unnecessary examinations are avoided.

Examinations should never be forced or culturally inappropriate and professionals should be qualified,

trained in gender-sensitive and culturally sensitive issues and knowledgeable about protocols and/or

guidelines provided in this regard

(

). Examinations involving nudity or the examination, observation

and/or measurements of genitalia or intimate parts must be precluded since they are highly intrusive.

If any of the methods applied during the age assessment offers a result that indicates that a person is less

than 18

ars of age, the assessment should be stopped. In such cases, if the claimed age is within the

range provided it should be taken as valid; however, if it is not, the lowest age of the margin should be

taken as valid instead.

▪

When several examinations are required due to subsequent and inconclusive results, the final

results should be analysed by a panel of experts

� Th

ese experts should have different fields of

expertise and common knowledge or experience of working with children. A panel of experts

with a multidisciplinary background should bring together social workers, forensic practitioners,

child protection specialists and case workers with child-specific expertise.

▪

When this is not possible or in cases where only a single method is used, at least two experts should

carry out the assessment. It should be guaranteed that the views of both qualified experts have been

provided and both have agreed on a decision. If both experts cannot agree on a final decision, it could

be recommended to escalate the case and have the decision taken by an experienced and qualified

supervisor.

If an agreement cannot be reached, the age assessment should be considered to be inconclusive and benefit

of the doubt should be applied. In such cases the applicant should be considered a child.

A decision should be motivated, issued in writing and explained orally. The experts’ professional

qualifications, experience and relevant training should be mentioned in it as well as the margin of error

of the methods used. The applicant should be informed of the possibility to challenge the decision and, if

applicable, to be provided with legal assistance to do so.

As the consequences of being identified as an adult or a child are far-reaching, the applicant should be

given the opportunity to challenge the results in a prompt and accessible manner. Possible venues through

which an applicant can challenge the results of assessment are through appeals or judicial reviews.

Furthermore, the process should factor in the possibility that new information can be provided once the

assessment has been concluded; therefore, a later revision of the assessed age must be possible.

In the case of incorrect age estimation, immediate action should be taken to rectify the information in a

streamlined and effective manner and all amendments should be replicated in the necessary databases.

(

) See, for instance, separated children in Europe programme, Position paper on age assessment in the context of separated children in Europe, (2012),

available at http://www.scepnetwork.org/images/16/163.pdf or http://www.scepnetwork.org/p/1/76/position-papers

44 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Overview of the age assessment methods

Chapter 4 Overview of the age assessment

methods

The methods currently in use are classified as medical and non-medical depending on whether they require

the involvement of a physician. Under medical methods, a distinction between radiation-free methods

and methods involving radiation has been made.

This classification and the gradual use of the methods to prevent unnecessary examinations are reflected

in the following flow chart. No reference is made to the safeguards and rights of the process since they

were analysed in both the previous chapter and in the age assessment process flow chart.

Flow chart of the methods

Claimed age is not in doubt:

evidence confirms or does not

contradict the claimed age.

No need for age assessment.

Analysis of evidence (documents, statements) and first estimations

Claimed age is in doubt:

several elements of evidence

contradict the claimed age.

Possible age assessment.

Conclusive and

challengeable results

Conclusive and

challengeable results

Conclusive and

challengeable results

Non-medical methods

• Further assessment of evidence.

• Age assessment interview.

• Phychological assessment.

Medical method — radiaon free

• Dental observaon.

• MRI

• Physical development.

Medical method — radiaon

(as low as reasonably achievable)

• Carpal X-ray.

• Collar bone X-ray.

• Dental X-ray.

Overview of the age assessment methods EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 45

Guidance on the gradual implementaon of methods

As soon as the wish to apply for international protection is expressed by the applicants, they become

entitled to certain rights (to remain in the territory, to basic material reception conditions and to have his or

her special needs identified or assessed). In case of a possible child, the identification of special procedural

needs and the provision of special reception conditions are a priority due to their inherent vulnerability.

In accordance with Article

25(

5) APD (recast), all evidence obtained may help to establish the child’s age

and/or eliminate or alleviate the need to undertake additional age assessments; therefore, it should be

the starting point before deciding whether there is a need for age assessment or not.

Analysis of available evidence and first estimations

As stated in Article 24 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and in Article 7 of the CRC:

‘Every child shall be registered immediately after birth and has the right to acquire a nationality.’

A birth certificate is the document that bears witness to the person’s birth, the date, the place, the sex

and the parents. The primary purpose of civil registration is to create a legal document that can be used

to establish and protect the rights of the individual.

As mentioned earlier, some countries do not systematically register the vital events of their citizens

or residents (births, marriages and deaths) and some of them do it very rarely or late. Therefore, such

registration may not meet the standards of public records for the authorities in EU+ states (preventing

double registration of the same event, gaps or inconsistencies in the records, etc.). Furthermore, due

to events that occurred in their country of origin or the circumstances of their flight (armed conflicts or

persecution and/or discrimination from the national authorities, etc.), these legal documents may not be

available to persons in need of international protection and therefore they will not be able to provide valid

proof or reliable certificates of their identity.

Taking into consideration the abovementioned circumstances and the efforts of the applicant to submit all

the information at his or her disposal, authorities should accept the following documents, among others,

as supporting evidence:

▪

passports,

▪

ID documents,

▪

residence cards,

▪

travel documents such as the ones provided by the UNHCR,

▪

other countries’ certificates (religious or civil) probing the civil status (marriage, births, family booklet)

of the applicant or any family member with any reference to the age of the applicant.

Other than these documents, sources of useful information such as common databases (for example the

Schengen Information System (

), Eurodac or Interpol’s Stolen and Lost Travel Documents (

)) could contain

information on the applicant’s age.

Likewise, statements or documents available in the file of the applicant’s family members or relatives can

be used to clarify and/or confirm the claimed age without the need for further assessment. In order to

prevent endangering the child or family, special caution must be taken when collecting this kind of data.

This is particularly so in the international protection context.

(

) SIS: a large-scale information system that supports external border control and law enforcement cooperation in the Schengen area.

(

) SLTD: a database that contains records on stolen, lost or revoked travel documents such as passports, identity cards, UN laissez-passer or visa stamps.

46 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Overview of the age assessment methods

When performed by staff experienced in working with children, some first estimations based on physical

appearance can be used to reinforce the initial analysis. When used in conjunction with other available

information, these can then be used to support the results of a preliminary screening.

However, since the estimation is based purely on physical characteristics and can therefore easily lead

to arbitrary, subjective and inaccurate results, extreme caution must be taken when giving weight to

such considerations. For this reason, the observation of physical appearances cannot be considered as a

method of age assessment in and of itself, nor can it be used in isolation since it cannot provide any specific

chronological age with certainty.

Physical appearance may serve to separate or distinguish the obvious cases (persons with undoubted

characteristics of adults or children), but it should not be used for cases of late teens or young adults. In

those cases, benefit of the doubt (confirming the claimed age or referring to a proper age assessment)

shall apply until there are conclusive results.

The IOM and other experts warn that the life experiences of children may have influenced their development.

This would mean that they may be behind in certain aspects and more developed in others. Research in

the field shows that post-traumatic stress disorder may lead to premature biological ageing of between

ears and 10

ears of age

(

)�

As limitations in current methods may lead to an incorrect age assessment or estimation, a revision

mechanism must be in place to correct an age that has been inserted incorrectly into the system. Once an

age assessment has been identified as incorrect, appropriate actions should be taken immediately (change

of accommodation, appointment of a guardian if the applicant is found to be a child, etc.).

DE — Applicable guidelines:

1� check of personal documents, search for additional information;

2� interview (two qualified and experienced staff members), overall impression of development

including qualified visual inspection;

3� in case of doubt, medical examination — method with the lowest impact on the child’s health.

NO — In all cases where an unaccompanied child has not presented a valid ID document with high

notoriety, there is a need to conduct a further investigation of the applicant’s identity including, among

others, age assessment. The basis of this age assessment is the information obtained about the applicant’s

age during the asylum process, i.e.:

▪

the applicant’s own information about his or her age;

▪

ID documents;

▪

ID information from other Member States (if the applicant has been identified in other countries);

▪

verification of the applicants ID in his or her country of origin;

▪

statement or comment on the applicant’s age from other actors such as a legal guardian, lawyer,

social service or health workers;

▪

statement or comment on the applicant’s age by the immigration police (who conducts the

registration of applicants) and a case owner who conducts the asylum interview;

▪

medical age examination;

▪

medical age assessment.

In cases where a medical age examination is conducted, the medical age assessment shall be assessed in

relation to other information in the case. The policy guidance provides guidelines on how to weigh the

various elements discussed above.

(

) Ladwig, K-H., Brockhaus, A.C., Baumert, J. et al., ‘Post-traumatic stress disorder and not depression is associated with shorter leukocyte telomere length:

findings from 3 000 participants in the population-based KORA F4 study’, Ouellette, M.M. (ed.), PLOS ONE, 2013, 8(7), e64762. doi:10.1371/journal.

pone�0064762�

Overview of the age assessment methods EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 47

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

27 EU+ states take the documents provided into consideraon as evidence of the applicant’s age.

In addion to the documents, some rst esmaons based on physical appearance are done in 19 EU+ states.

Claimed age is in doubt: potential need for age assessment

When there is substantiated doubt about the claimed age of the applicant (the claimed age is doubted, the

available evidence does not support it or contradicts it), the need for age assessment may arise. In such

cases, the authorities need to select the method or methods to use for that purpose.

An overall review of the methods currently in use, together with a brief description of the process involved,

follows in the next section. The methods are divided into ‘medical’ and ‘non-medical’ depending on whether

a clinician is involved or not. Medical methods are also classified depending on whether they imply the

use of radiation or not.

The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child’s General Comment No

6 s

tates that the identification

of a child as unaccompanied or separated includes age assessment, which should take into account

physical appearance, but also psychological maturity.

A. Non-medical methods

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

Three EU+ states only use non-medical methods to assess the age of applicants.

Further informaon can be found in Annex 4 to this publicaon.

1. Further assessment of evidence

When the initially collected documents or the available information do not include any reference to age,

a further assessment of other documents by the asylum or migration officials may be necessary. Some

documentation, even without containing the age, can provide some information on the estimative age of

the applicant, i.e. school records, family vaccination cards or other medical records. For example, one could

know that some vaccinations are received by an infant at a certain age or margin of age and that the card

was issued at a specific time, so as a result the owner’s age can be approximately estimated.

Not invasive

Genuine

documents are a

valuable form of

evidence

Avoids the need for

using other

methods

Applicants for internaonal

protecon may oen not have

access to documentaon, or any

aempt to obtain documents could

endanger the person or their family.

Lack of common understanding on

what type of documents can be

accepted or not.

PROS

CONS

48 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Overview of the age assessment methods

2. Age assessment interview

This method involves collecting and analysing the account given by the individual whose age is being

disputed.

The main differences between psychosocial assessment methods are the background and specific expertise

of the person conducting the assessment as well as the areas of exploration. Whereas the psychological

assessment would be conducted by experts in child psychology or child development, the age assessment

interview would be mainly conducted by officials serving with the asylum or migration authorities and

experienced in interviewing children in the asylum procedure.

During the age assessment interview, the interviewer attempts to reconstruct a chronological sequence of life

events where the age of the person can be deducted or estimated. A local calendar of events

(

) (a customised

calendar which provides dates of significance events for a specific geographic area) combined with ‘before

and after questions’

(

) (aimed at identifying two known events, one having occurred before and one having

occurred after the child’s date of birth — these questions are also known as ‘sandwich questions’) can be

useful tools to assist the officials, the applicant or the family members to approximate the child’s birthdate.

▪

In order to gather the views in a child-friendly manner and encourage the child to provide

information, officials directly dealing with the child should be trained in the use of child-

friendly interview techniques

(

). Where possible the interpreter should also be familiar with

interviewing children.

▪

Providing the applicant with adequate information before the interview starts is essential to

guarantee the participation of the person, to develop a collaborative attitude and to build trust

between the actors involved. The interviewer needs to provide relevant information in simple

terms (the purpose of the interview, the role of the persons involved and present, and the

reasons why the claimed age is in doubt), must ensure that the applicant understands both

the information and the interpreter and must make sure that the needs of the applicant have

been met to the maximum extent possible (gender of the interviewer and of the interpreter,

the necessary arrangements for the interview, etc.). It is equally important that the applicant is

given the opportunity to clarify any inconsistencies during the interview.

▪

When deciding to undertake the age assessment process it should be guaranteed that the burden

of proof is shifted to the authorities in the case of children. Children are not able to explain things in

the same way that adults can and this limitation is particularly evident when speaking with children

who have a different cultural background and where age may not be as relevant as in Western

cultures (for example, different calendars are used in different cultures). Furthermore, they may

consider themselves to be adults or might be considered to be adults in their communities.

▪

The interviewer must be familiar with country of origin information in order to be able to detect

relevant issues during the discussion

(

)�

▪

Ultimately, if the conclusion of the assessment is adverse to the applicant, the reasons must

be clearly explained through the use of an interpreter and in the presence of the child’s

representative/guardian/lawyer. The applicant should be informed both orally and in writing of

the possibility and procedure to challenge the decision.

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

17 EU+ states conduct an age assessment interview to assess the age of the applicants.

Further informaon can be found in Annex 4 to this publicaon.

(

) More information can be found in the Food and Agriculture Organisation’s Guidelines for estimating the month and year of birth of young children (2008)�

(

) More information can be found in the Food and Agriculture Organisation’s Guidelines for estimating the month and year of birth of young children (2008)�

(

) More information about the EASO ‘Interviewing children’ training module is available at https://www.easo.europa.eu/training-quality/training�

(

) EASO gathers and develops country of origin information available on the EASO website, https://www.easo.europa.eu/information-analysis/country-

origin-information/country-reports, and on the restricted EASO COI Portal.

Overview of the age assessment methods EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 49

Examples from pracce

IE — If a person claims to be aged under 18 years of age but appears to be older at the International

Protection Office, an experienced staff member (with the assistance of an interpreter if required) will

conduct an informal interview to try and form a reasonable opinion on whether the person is a minor

and in need of referral to TUSLA, a child and family agency. The interview includes questions on details of

early childhood, education and the ages of other family members. If there is any uncertainty following the

interview, benefit of the doubt is given in favour of the applicant and the referral to TUSLA takes place.

MT — The first step is an interview within 10 working days with the age assessment panel. If the age

remains in dispute then other professionals are involved, including a referral to a radiology department

for hand and wrist X-rays. The current procedure involves a multidisciplinary effort which includes police

authorities, professionals from the caring professions and medical professionals. The interview, one of

the main tools used for such an assessment, can be considered to be holistic in that it aims to capture

as complete a systemic profile of the alleged minor as possible. The subsequent results of the methods

selected by the age assessment team are considered collectively.

Not physically invasive

Respects the right to parcipate

in the process and have the

child’s own views heard

The informaon

obtained can be used to

assess the special needs

of the person

Wide margin of error

in the concluding

results

It is perceived as

subjecve (results

have not been tested

with a reference

group of known age)

PROS

CONS

3. Psychosocial assessment

The aim of this method is to assess mental rather than physical maturation. Assessment techniques make

use of cognitive and behavioural appraisal and psychological assessment of the applicant to assess his or

her age. Therefore, the assessor needs to have specific expertise in psychology or in the developmental

stages of children and young adults.

The basis of this method is a semi-structured interview in which an experienced and trained assessor

(usually a social worker or a psychologist) explores areas of the person’s life story. During the interview

or interviews, the assessor would assess the psychological maturity of the person in conjunction with a

behavioural appraisal. The results may also reflect some estimations based on physical appearance.

In order to be effective, trust between the examinee and the assessor is essential. For this reason, the

assessment should be undertaken over a period of time and should involve other professionals in contact

with the assessed person, such as reception staff or teachers. Some relevant indications in this regard

were provided in the benchmark case-law from the UK High Court of Justice, the Merton judgment (

)�

This judgment gives ‘guidance as to the requirements of a lawful assessment by a local authority of the

age of a young asylum-seeker claiming to be under the age of 18 years’. Following the Merton judgment,

all (local) authorities are required to ensure their assessments are full and comprehensive and that the

process for assessing age is clear, transparent and fair.

(

) B v. London Borough of Merton (2003) EWHC 1689 (admin), in which judgment was handed down by Justice Stanley Burnton in the High Court on 14 July 2003.

50 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Overview of the age assessment methods

A Merton-compliant assessment will normally include a face-to-face meeting with the young person,

setting out the general background of the applicant and adhering to standards of fairness

(

). A relevant

consideration would be the following.

It is important to be mindful of the ‘coaching’ that the asylum-seeker may have had prior to the interview,

on how to behave and what to say. Having clarified the role of the social services, it is important to engage

with the person and establish as much rapport as the circumstances allow. This process is sometimes

known as ‘joining’.

Some important aspects to be observed when conducting the assessment are highlighted in relevant

case-law:

•

en possible, two assessors should be involved in the process;

• information on the role of the assessor/s and the interpreter should be provided according to the

educational and maturity level of the person;

•

tention should also be paid to the level of tiredness, trauma, bewilderment and anxiety of the

assessed person;

•

e ethnicity, culture and customs of the person being assessed must be observed throughout

the assessment — the country of origin information may be of help in this regard to flag relevant

topics for discussion;

• when undertaking the assessment, the assessor should ask open-ended and non-leading questions;

•

e assessor could use different tools to ease the account of the person (drawings, expressive tools).

When conducting the interview, the following features might provide useful information to make an age

estimation:

▪

the applicant’s physical appearance and demeanour, observations of groups dynamics (activities

with peers);

▪

manner of interaction with the assessor;

▪

social history and family composition;

▪

developmental considerations (i.e. information about the types of activities that the person was

involved in before arriving in Europe);

▪

education, level of independence and self-care;

▪

health and medical assessment;

▪

life experiences and traumatic events that may have had an impact on the ageing process.

This information should be considered in conjunction with the information obtained from the analysis

of other evidence and then used to draw the conclusion from the assessment. The conclusion of the

assessment must be provided in writing and the aforementioned aspects should be included in the report,

with additional considerations or information to follow up. It is of the utmost importance to ensure the

youth welfare expertise and experience of the assessor/s.

When the conclusion of the assessment is adverse to the applicant, the reasons must be clearly explained

through the use of an interpreter and in the presence of the child’s representative/guardian/lawyer. The

applicant should be informed both orally and in writing of the possibility and procedure to challenge the

decision

(

) The Merton compliant is often used to describe whether an age assessment is case-law compliant. There is no prescribed way in which local authorities

are obliged to carry out age assessments; the courts, however, provided guidance to local authorities in a case involving the Merton Council (B v. London

Borough of Merton (2003) EW HC 1689 (admin)). All local authority age assessments must be compliant with the case-law of Merton and following case-

law since this judgment.

Overview of the age assessment methods EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 51

UK — Guidelines on how to conduct in line with the general rulings. Those who are assessing age must:

1. explain to the claimant the purpose of the interview, as specified in Merton, paragraph 55;

2. seek to elicit the general background of the claimant, including the claimant’s family circumstances and

history and educational background and the claimant’s activities during the previous few years — ethnic

and cultural information may also be important — as specified in Merton, paragraph

;

3. make an assessment of and ask questions to test the claimant’s credibility if there is reason to doubt

the claimant’s statement as to their age, as specified in Merton, paragraph

;

4. give the claimant the opportunity to explain any inconsistencies in their account or anything which is

likely to result in adverse credibility findings — this is best done as soon as possible, when matters are

‘fresh in the mind’, as specified in:

•

Mer

ton, paragraph 55,

• R (FZ) v London Borough of Croydon (2011) EWCA Civ 59, paragraph 20,

•

R (

NA) v London Borough of Croydon (2009) EWHC 2357 (admin), paragraph 52;

5. remember that cases vary and the level of inquiry required in one case may not be necessary in another,

as specified in Merton, paragraph 50.

The Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS) in the UK has endorsed the following guidance

for social workers when carrying out age assessments.

http://adcs.org.uk/assets/documentation/Age_Assessment_Guidance_2015_Final.pdf

http://adcs.org.uk/assets/documentation/information_sharing_proforma_april_2015.doc

A shortened form is available at http://www.makeitlooknice.co.uk/adcs/age-assessment-guidance/index.html

PROS

CONS

Not physically invasive

Takes into account maturity

as well as personal

experiences

Respects the right to

parcipate in the process

and have his or her own

views heard

Informaon obtained can

be used to assess the

special needs of the person

Wide margin of error in the

concluding results on its own,

therefore it should be used in

conjuncon with other methods

Perceived as subjecve and

non-scienﬁcally valid (results

have not been tested through a

validaon study)

May be (psychologically)

intrusive if the person has to

recall traumac events

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

11 EU+ states may use social workers’ experse to assess the age of the applicant. Likewise, the results

showed that six EU+ states conduct psychological interviews to assess the age as reected in the previous

publicaon (one uses this method for vicms of THB).

Further informaon can be found in Annex 4 to this publicaon.

52 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Overview of the age assessment methods

B. Medical methods (radiaon-free)

1. Dental observaon

This method involves visual inspection in order to determine the maturity of teeth and does not involve the

use of an X-ray. A trained dentist compares the applicant’s teeth development to a set of developmental

stages as laid out in established eruption charts or reference values and establishes a range of possible

ages. Studies tend to cover either the development of children’s teeth for the age span of 3-16

ars or

the development of the wisdom teeth in the age group 15-23

ars

(

)�

PROS

CONS

Does not use

radiaon, only

external

observaon

The tooth

mineralisaon is

not aﬀected by

ethnicity or

nutrion

Not designed to esmate the

chronological age, just to conﬁrm

if the development of this speciﬁc

case follows the average or not

The only teeth that can be used as

an indicator of adulthood are the

third molars, which may or may

not appear at any me between

age 15 and 23

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

16 EU+ states use dental observaon as an age assessment method.

Further informaon can be found in Annex

4 t

o this publicaon.

2. Magnec resonance imaging

MRI, or MR, combines the use of a powerful magnet with an advanced computer system and radio waves to

produce accurate detailed pictures of organs and tissues, bones and other internal body structures. Unlike

X-rays or CT/CAT scans (computed tomography, also called computed axial tomography), MRI machines

are radiation free.

The strength of an MRI magnet is called ‘field strength’ and is measured in units called ‘Tesla’ or ‘T.’ There

are two types of scanners: 1 T. and 1.5 T. scanners (usually widely available at a lower cost) and 3 T. scanners

(more expensive thus less available). Higher field strength means the scanner has a stronger magnet and

the ability to produce more detailed images in a shorter period of time. Depending on a number of factors,

such as the type of images to be obtained (cross-sections or ‘slices’ of the body), the type of technology

used (high field versus open or open upright MRI), the intended outcome of the MRI and if the patient

moves, an MRI scan can typically last from between less than 10 minutes to 1 hour.

According to George et al. (

), the degree of bone fusion appears to be at a more advanced stage in

images from X-rays than in MRI images. Consequently, the results from an MRI would give a slightly lower

(

) For more information: Unicef, Age assessment practices: a literature review and annotated bibliography, available at http://www.unicef.org/protection/

Age_Assessment_Practices_2010.pdf; SCEP, Position paper on age assessment in the context of separated children in Europe (2012), available at http://www.

scepnetwork.org/images/16/163.pdf ; Norwegian Computing Centre, Age estimation in youths and young adults (2012), available at http://publications.

nr.no/1355995517/Age_estimation_methods-Eikvil.pdf; Baccetti, T., Franchi, L. and McNamara, J.A. (Jr), ‘The cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) method for

the assessment of optimal treatment timing in Dentofacial orthopaedics’, ScienceDirect, (2005), Vol. 11, Issue 3, pp. 119-129; Cameriere, R., Ferrante, L. and

Cingolani, M., ‘Age estimation in children by measurement of open apices in teeth’, PubMed, (2005), Vol.

20, Issue

, pp.

9-52.

(

) George, J., Nagendran, J. and Azmi, K., ‘Comparison study of growth plate fusion using MRI versus plain radiographs as used in age determination for

exclusion of overaged football players’, Br J Sports Med, (2012), Vol. 46, Issue 4, pp. 273-278, doi:10.1136/bjsm.2010.074948.

Overview of the age assessment methods EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 53

age estimation than the results from a plain radiograph. This outcome is acceptable as it would not be

detrimental to the applicant.

A pre-screening procedure needs to be followed. MRI scans may not be suitable for all patients, such as

applicants with cardiac pacemakers, tattoos and metal implants or in need of other special precautions

due to its magnetic field.

As applicants have to stay still on a hard table for a long period of time and the machine produces loud

knocking sounds, patients with claustrophobia and children typically get anxious when undergoing the

procedure in a traditional bore scanner. This problem may be solved through the use of open MRI scanners.

Hand/wrist: the traditional approach is based on age assessment from X-ray images; however, experiments

using alternative image modalities such as the MRI of the wrist have been carried out (for example in the age

estimation of football players in age-related tournaments). A system of six grades for fusion was designed

(Dvorak,

200

(

). In another study on football players performed by the Fédération Internationale de

Football Association, MRI and X-ray wrist images acquired from the same person on the same day were

investigated for comparison

(

)�

Recent studies have confirmed the value of this examination and show a strong correlation between MRI

stages and the chronological age; however, combining the use of MRIs with other techniques to increase

the accuracy of the results is also recommended

(

)�

As the gender of the person being subjected to the assessment may have an effect on the method’s

margin of error

(

), the gender of the applicant is a factor that needs to be taken into consideration when

selecting the method.

Recent developments address the use of automatic bone age determination. These determinations are

based on medical computer vision and machine learning. These developments have made the classification

of the images into the stages easier and have reduced the inter-observer and intra-observer discrepancy

(defined in Annex

Glossary).

Knee: based on the fusion of growth plate in maturation of the knee.

The MRI staging system was developed for the knee (Dedouit, 2012) (

). Its reliability and validity for age

assessment has been evaluated in the age group 10-30

ars and is based on a five-stage system. The

report indicates a high correlation with age and good inter-observer and intra-observer discrepancy, but

further studies are needed to verify the approach.

Example from pracce

SE — Sweden is currently using the MRI of the knee joints, together with X-rays of the wisdom teeth, for

the age assessment procedure for unaccompanied children. The medical age assessment is conducted

by the Swedish National Board of Forensic Medicine and involves two different examinations. The first

one is a panoramic X-ray of a wisdom tooth and the second one is an MRI of the knee. Both examinations

are aimed at the 18-year limit. The images will be analysed by two independent dentists or radiologists

and these should mutually agree on the degree of maturity in the growth zone in order for the analysis

to provide a satisfactory basis for the medical examiner’s final age assessment. This is an integrated

protection mechanism and expression of the principle of benefit of the doubt.

(

) Dvorak, J. and George, J., ‘Age determination by magnetic resonance imaging of the wrist in adolescent male football players’, British Journal of Sports

Medicine, (2007), Vol. 41, No 1, pp. 45-52.

(

) I b i d .

(

) Serin, J., Rérolle, C., Pucheux, J., Dedouit, F., Telmon, N., Savall, F., and Saint-Martin, P., ‘Contribution of magnetic resonance imaging of the wrist and hand

to forensic age assessment’, International Journal of Legal Medicine, (2016).

(

) Tscholl, P.M, Junge, A., Dvorak, J. and Zubler, V., ‘MRI of the wrist is not recommended for age determination in female football players of U-16/U-17

competitions’, Scand J Med Sci Sports, (2015), doi:10.1111/sms.12461.

(

) Dedouit, F. and Auriol, ‘Age assessment by magnetic resonance imaging of the knee: a preliminary study’, Forensic Science International, (2012), pp. 217-232.

54 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Overview of the age assessment methods

Assessing that an applicant’s age is over 18 also requires that the tooth root has reached the final level

of maturity, although this level of development rather occurs 1-2

ars after the 18-year limit. The same

level of maturity in the growth zone (1-2

ars after the 18-year limit) is studied when it comes to the

MRI of the knee. These are additional safeguards to better respond to the need to maintain benefit of

the doubt when this is called for.

Clavicle: experiments have been carried out using a four-stage grading system for the clavicle. These have

shown that age estimation is feasible but MRI-specific reference studies are needed. Recent research has

shown a positive correlation between MRI stages and chronological age

(

). However, the observation

would require more experienced observers than in other methods, since it may be difficult to distinguish

the initial stages from the latest stages of ossification.

Radiaon-free method.

Perceived as

scienﬁcally valid

(results have been

tested through a

validaon study)

Visualises mulple

growth characteriscs

Strong posive

correlaon between

MRI stages and

chronological age

Expensive equipment and

specialist experse are required

May require prolonged

examinaons where the person

needs to remain sll, becoming

unsuitable for young children

Not suitable in case

of the presence of metal

in the body (higher risks of

undetected scraps in persons

from areas with war

or conﬂict)

PROS

CONS

3. Ultrasound

A medical ultrasound (also known as diagnostic sonography or ultrasonography) is a diagnostic imaging

technique based on the use of ultrasound to see internal body structures such as tendons, muscles, joints,

vessels and internal organs.

An ultrasound is sound waves with frequencies which are higher than those audible to humans (> 20 000 Hz).

Ultrasonic images, also known as sonograms, are made by sending pulses of ultrasound into tissue using a

probe. The sound echoes off the tissue, with different tissues reflecting varying degrees of sound. These

echoes are recorded and displayed as an image to the operator. This radiation-free method has been tested

for age estimation on the hand and wrist

(

), the clavicle (

) and the iliac crest (

)�

The studies concluded that assessment by ultrasound should not yet be considered a valid replacement

for bone age assessment since the growth stages are not always visualised.

(

) 1. Hillewig, E., Degroote, J., Van der Paelt, T., Visscher, A., Vandemaele, P., Lutin, B., D’Hooghe, L., Vandriessche, V., Piette, M. and Verstraete, K., ‘Magnetic

resonance imaging of the sternal extremity of the clavicle in forensic age estimation: towards more sound age estimates’, Int J Legal Med., (2013), Vol.

27,

Issue 3, pp. 677-689, doi:10.1007/s00414-012-0798-z.

2. Hillewig, E., De Tobel, J., Cuche, O., Vandemaele, P., Piette, M. and Verstraete, K., ‘Magnetic resonance imaging of the medial extremity of the clavicle in

forensic bone age determination: a new four-minute approach’, Eur Radiol., (2011), Vol. 21, Issue 4, pp. 757-767, doi:10.1007/s00330-010-1978-1.

(

) Mentzel, H.J., Vilser, C., Eulenstein, M., Schwartz, T., Vogt, S., Böttcher, J., Yaniv, I., Tsoref, L., Kauf, E. and Kaiser, W.A., ‘Assessment of skeletal age

at the wrist in children with a new ultrasound device’, Pediatr Radiol, (2005), Vol. 35, Issue 4, pp. 429-433; Khan, K.M., Miller, B.S., Hoggard, E.,

Somani, A. and Sarafoglou, K., ‘Application of ultrasound for bone age estimation in clinical practice’, J Pediatr, (2009), Vol. 152, Issue 2, pp. 243-247,

doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.08.018.

(

) Quirmbach, F., Ramsthaler, F. and Verhoff, M.A, ‘Evaluation of the ossification of the medial clavicular epiphysis with a digital ultrasonic system to

determine the age threshold of 21 years’, Int J Legal Med., (2009), Vol. 123, Issue 3, pp. 241-245, doi: 10.1007/s00414-009-0335-x.; Schulz, R., Zwiesigk,

P., Schiborr, M., Schmidt, S. and Schmeling, A., ‘Ultrasound studies on the time course of clavicular ossification’, Int J Legal Med., (2008), Vol. 122, Issue 2,

pp. 163-167, doi: 10.1007/s00414-007-0220-4.

(

) Schmidt, S., Schmeling, A., Zwiesigk, P., Pfeiffer, H. and Schulz, R. ‘Sonographic evaluation of apophyseal ossification of the iliac crest in forensic age

diagnostics in living individuals’, Int J Legal Med., (2011), Vol. 125, Issue 2, pp. 271-276, doi: 10.1007/s00414-011-0554-9.

Overview of the age assessment methods EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 55

Radiaon-free method

with no contraindicaons

Equipment is economic,

portable and widely

available

Perceived as a scienﬁcally

valid method (results

have been tested through

a validaon study)

Not suitable for age

assessment at this moment

as the technology does not

allow visualisaon of all the

(emerging) growth stages

Does not allow for a

reassessment of the results

without a re-examinaon of

the person

PROS

CONS

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

+ state has reported the use of ultrasound or sonography for age assessment purposes.

Further informaon can be found in Annex 4 to this publicaon.

4. Physical development assessment

Physical development assessment includes the comparison of height, weight and skin rating across

individuals or populations in relation to a set of reference values. Depending on the EU+ state’s practice,

the physical development assessment may include a general physical examination to describe any signs

of a condition which may interfere with the maturation rate

(

)�

When it involves measuring and assessing visible signs of sexual maturity it is also called sexual maturation

observation

�

• In boys, examination is based on penile and testicular development, pubic hair, axillary hair, beard

growth and laryngeal prominence.

•

girls, the examination is focused on breast development, pubic hair, axillary hair and shape of

the hip. On average, girls reach full sexual maturity at the age of 16 years and boys at the age of

17 years (

)�

Depending on the practice and the examinations carried out in the specific EU+ states, apart from a

paediatrician, other physicians such as a gynaecologist may be involved.

As reflected in the final recommendations and through the guidance, EASO considers that no

method implying nudity or the examination of genitalia as a sexual maturity observation should

be used under any circumstance.

(

) For more information: Unicef, Age assessment practices: a literature review and annotated bibliography (2011), available at http://www.unicef.org/

protection/Age_Assessment_Practices_2010.pdf; SCEP, Position paper on age assessment in the context of separated children in Europe (2012), available

at http://www.scepnetwork.org/images/16/163.pdf ; Norwegian Computing Centre, Age estimation in youths and young adults (2012), available at http://

publications.nr.no/1355995517/Age_estimation_methods-Eikvil.pdf; Professor Sir Al Aynsley-Green Kt., The assessment of age in undocumented migrants

(2011), available at https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/ageassessment/submissions/Sir

0Al

0Aynsley-Green

0Kt

(Submission %2038).pdf�

(

) For more information: SCEP, Position paper on age assessment in the context of separated children in Europe (2012); Unicef, Age assessment practices:

a literature review and annotated bibliography; Schmeling et al., ‘Forensic age estimation in unaccompanied minors and young living adults’ in Forensic

medicine — From old problems to new challenges (2011); Schmeling et al., ‘Age estimation of unaccompanied minors — Part 1. General considerations’,

Forensic Science International, (2006). The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health concludes that ‘overall, it is not possible to actually predict the

age of an individual from any anthropometric measure, and this should not be attempted’ (The King’s Fund and the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child

Health, 1999:40).

56 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Overview of the age assessment methods

Used to detect growth

disorders that could be

relevant to the age

assessment, but not to

esmate the

chronological age

When the assessment

is done by

paediatricians, since

they are specialists in

the physical and

psychological

development of

children, it takes into

account a child’s

physical well-being

Physically invasive, it might be very distressful and

traumac for persons with diﬀerent backgrounds and

who have been exposed to abuse and exploitaon

during or prior to their migraon. In case of

examinaon of inmate parts or genitalia, it would

conﬂict with the right to privacy and dignity and

physical and mental integrity due to the highly intrusive

nature of the examinaon

Anthropometric measurements do not take into

consideraon variaons between ethnicity, race,

nutrional intake and socioeconomic background

Lack of protocols: in some cases it may imply

assessment of sexual development, in other it does not

Evaluang sexual maturity has a wide margin of error. Of

the forensic methods analysed, trying to esmate the

age on the basis of physical traits is the least accurate

PROS

CONS

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

11 EU+ states conrmed the use of the physical development assessment to esmate the age of an

applicant.

Seven EU+ states resort to sexual maturity observaon to assess the age of a person.

Further informaon can be found in Annex

4 t

o this publicaon.

C. Medical methods (using radiaon)

1. X-ray

X-ray, also called ‘radiography’, projects limited radiation (called electromagnetic waves) to generate the

images of the inside of the body in different shades of black and white. This is because different tissues

absorb different amounts of radiation. Calcium in bones absorbs X-rays the most, so bones look white. Fat

and other soft tissues absorb less and look grey. Air absorbs the least, so lungs look black.

Skeletal age is determined from the development stage of bones. These examinations estimate development

stages from the fusion/maturation of specific bones. The main methods of X-ray include carpal, collarbone,

dental or hip. While many EU+ states make use of these methods they do not apply them in the same way

and often use different combinations and/or order. This diversity of practices is mainly due to the fact that

age assessment procedures remain, to a large extent, determined by national legislation with procedures

evolving through national jurisprudence.

Overview of the age assessment methods EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 57

Carpal (hand/wrist) X-ray

This consists of the evaluation of the form, the size of bone elements and the degree of epiphyseal

ossification through hand radiographs. An image is compared against the following.

(a)

diographic atlas, which consists of standard images of the relevant age and sex to determine

the development stage. For this approach, the Greulich and Pyle atlas has become the standard

reference. This method was a result of a 1935 study which aimed to assess skeletal maturity rather

than evaluate age, and it did not take into account interracial or socioeconomic differences.

(b)

Ind

ividual bones (single bone method) where the degree of maturity is determined for the

individual bones and combined to calculate an overall maturity stage. For this approach, the Tanner-

Whitehouse approach (exists in three editions) is the main reference. The second edition is based

on the assessment of skeletal maturity and a prediction of adult height. Each of the 20 bones in the

hand is individually compared with a series of pictures of the development of that particular bone.

Reference standards were established in the 1950s and 1960s. On average the skeletal development

of hand bones is complete at the age of 17

ars in girls and at 18

ars in boys

(

)�

While ethnic origin does not exert a noteworthy influence on ossification rates, socioeconomic status

is a key factor that affects the rate of ossification. A high socioeconomic status accelerates ossification

rates, whereas low socioeconomic status delays ossification. Consequently, applying X-ray standards to

individuals of a lower socioeconomic status leads to underestimating a person’s age. This is considered to

be acceptable as it would not have an adverse effect on the examined person (

)�

Collar bone X-ray

This method involves assessing the fusion of the clavicle. To be determined an adult, both clavicles of

the individual have to be fused. Traditional classification systems differentiate between four stages of

development; the last stage has now been divided into two additional stages. (If the fusion is complete

and a scar is visible it can be assumed in the case of women that the person is at least 20 years old, and in

the case of men that the person is at least 21

ars old.) Total fusion of the clavicle with the scar no longer

showing was first noted in both sexes at the age of 26 years at the earliest (

)�

Dental X-ray

This method involves studying an X-ray of teeth, known as an orthopantogram. Skeletal development is

measured through the sequential changes in the eruption and structure of teeth during childhood growth.

By the age of 16-20 years of age, all teeth except the third molars (wisdom teeth) are fully formed. At this

stage the latter show a wide range of the developing crown and root.

The two main methods are as follows:

(a) Gleiser and Hunt (1955) (

) describe tooth development in 15 stages;

(b)

mirjian (1973)

(

) describes the tooth development in eight stages, where each stage of the teeth

growth is given a score according to a statistical model

(

)�

(

) For more information: Tanner, J.M. et al., ‘Reliability and validity of computer-assisted estimates of Tanner-Whitehouse skeletal maturity (CASAS):

comparison with the manual method’, Karger, (1994), Vol. 42, No 6; Frisch, H. et al., ‘Computer-aided estimation of skeletal age and comparison with bone

age evaluations by the method of Greulich-Pyle and Tanner-Whitehouse’, Pediatric Radiology, (1996), Vol. 26, Issue 3, pp. 226-231; Gertych, A. et al., ‘Bone

age assessment of children using a digital hand atlas’, Computerised Medical Imaging and Graphics, (2007), Vol. 31, Issues 4-5, pp. 322-331.

(

) Schmeling, A., Garamendi, P.M., Prieto, J.L. and Landa, M. I., ‘Forensic age estimation in unaccompanied minors and young living adults’, in Forensic medicine

— From old problems to new challenges, Professor Duarte Nuno Vieira (Ed.), InTech, (2011), available from: http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs-wm/19163.pdf �

(

) For more information: Schmeling, A. et al., ‘Studies on the time-frame for ossification of the medial clavicular epiphyseal cartilage in conventional

radiography’, International Journal of Legal Medicine, (2004), Vol.

18, Issue

, pp.

-8.

(

) Gleiser, I. and Hunt, E. E. ‘The permanent mandibular first molar: its calcification, eruption and decay’, Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., (1955), Vol. 13, pp. 253-283,

doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330130206

(

) Demirjian, A., Goldstein, H. and Tanner, J. M., ‘A new system of dental age assessment’, Human Biology, (1973), Vol. 45, No 2, pp. 211-227, available at

http://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/cmm/migrated/documents/dental-age-assessment.pdf

(

) For more information: (al n.d.), ‘Assessment of dental maturity of Brazilian children age 6 to 14 years using Demirjian’s method’, Int J Paediatr Dent, (2002),

Vol. 12, No 6, pp. 423-428; Liversidge, H.M., ‘The assessment and interpretation of Demirjian, Goldstein and Tanner’s dental maturity’, Ann Hum Biol.,

(2012), Vol. 39, Issue 5, pp. 412-431, doi:10.3109/03014460.2012.716080.

58 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Overview of the age assessment methods

With regard to the eruption and mineralisation of the third molars, it has been ascertained that black Africans

display an accelerated development when compared to Europeans; by contrast, a relative retardation in

the development can be recorded in the case of Asians. For this reason, population-specific reference

studies should be used to assess the development of third molars in the practice of age estimation

(

)�

Despite its wide variability, different studies have claimed that the development of the third molar probably

provides the best way to discriminate between an adult and a child and should be one of the most used

age assessment procedures for late teenage individuals.

Pelvic bone X-ray

As positioning of the bones change as a person approaches adulthood (

), skeletal age can be determined

by the appearance of certain bones of the pelvis.

Perceived as scienﬁcally valid

(results have been tested

through a validaon study)

According to the protocols

and studies, the margin of

error is measured and

reported

Equipment is easily accessible

and economic

Examinaon me is short and

allows for superposioning

diﬀerent images

Physically intrusive since

it uses radiaon

Opposion on ethical

grounds to radiology for

migraon control purposes

without therapeuc beneﬁt

Results may be diﬃcult to

interpretate for non-medical

experts

Does not take into

consideraon psychological

maturity

PROS

CONS

Key ndings from EU+ states’ pracce

Among medical examinaons, the carpal X-ray is the method most used by EU+

ates. 23

spondents

conrmed its use in their territory.

Secondly, the dental X-ray is also quite common among the respondents, with 19 posive replies.

Thirdly, 12 EU+ states use the collar bone X-ray.

Finally, three EU+ states added the pelvic bone X-ray as an alternave method to be used occasionally

in the process.

Example from pracce

FI — A medical age assessment to establish the age of an applicant is carried out by the Department of

Forensic Medicine at the University of Helsinki at the request of the police, the Border Guard or Finnish

Immigration Service. Methods used are dental observation, carpal X-ray and dental X-ray. Two experts

shall draw up a joint assessment. At least one of the experts shall be an employee of the Department of

Forensic Medicine at the University of Helsinki. An expert may be an approved medical practitioner or

an approved dentist with the necessary competence.

(

) Olze, A., Schmeling, A., Taniguchi, M., Maeda, H., van Niekerk, P., Wernecke, K-D. and Geserick, G., ‘Forensic age estimation in living subjects: the ethnic

factor in wisdom tooth mineralization’, Int J Legal Med, (2004), Vol. 118, pp. 170-173; Olze, A., van Niekerk, P., Ishikawa, T., Zhu, B.L., Schulz, R., Maeda, H.

and Schmeling, A., ‘Comparative study on the effect of ethnicity on wisdom tooth eruption’, Int J Legal Med, (2007), Vol. 121, pp. 445-448.

(

) For more information: Schmeling, A. et al., ‘Age estimation of unaccompanied minors — Part 1. General considerations’, Forensic Science International,

(2006); Schmidt, S. et al., ‘Sonographic evaluation of apophyseal ossification of the iliac crest in forensic age diagnostics in living individuals’, International

Journal of Legal Medicine, (2011).

Overview of the age assessment methods EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 59

NL — The medical age assessment does not attempt to establish the age of the applicant, but is only meant

to distinguish between adulthood and possible minority. In light of this, a hand/wrist X-ray is analysed.

If the wrist is not completely fused, the examination ends and the applicant is considered a minor. If it

is completely fused, an additional (three) collarbone X-rays will be taken. Two independent radiologists

have to separately come to the conclusion that both clavicles are fused. An additional expert (forensic

anthropologist), after gathering both radiologists’ conclusions, will make a decision on the basis of their

results. In case of inconclusive results or disagreement between the radiologists’ reports, the applicant

is considered a minor. The decision can be appealed.

Some addional consideraons

MRI, X-ray and computed tomography (CT/CAT) are different techniques used to capture the image of the

bone growth. These images will be compared to reference studies to establish the stage of the growth

development that the image corresponds to and eventually to frame the range of age related to this

growth stage.

Another important factor to be taken into consideration is the latest developments in the use of computer-

assisted interpretation of X-ray images or of MRI images. The purpose of this software is to reduce the

intra-observer and inter-observer deviation (called inter-rater), so the same image is categorised in the

same way despite possible intra-observer (same observer evaluating the same image at different times)

or inter-observer (different observers evaluating the same image) errors.

MRI or MR

•

Combines a powerful magnet with an advanced computer system and radio waves to produce

accurate, detailed pictures of organs and tissues, bones and other internal body structures. To

produce the cross-sectional imaging, an MRI uses magnetic fields and radio frequencies.

•

itable for imaging organs, soft tissue and internal structures.

•

diation free.

X-ray

• An X-ray uses a limited amount of radiation that passes through the body to capture a single

image of the examinee’s anatomy.

• Dense objects, such as bones, block the radiation and appear white on the X-ray picture.

• Involves radiation.

CT/CAT

• Examination that combines X-rays with computers to produce 360-degree, cross-sectional views

of the body through multiple X-rays taken at different angles.

• Suitable for image bone, soft tissue and blood vessels all at the same time. It provides the

radiologist with details of bony structures or injuries. Due to the radiation exposure, the CT is

not recommended for pregnant women or children unless absolutely necessary.

60 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Final recommendaons

Chapter 5 Final recommendaons

The final recommendations do not intend to summarise the guidance on the procedural safeguards

included in Chapters

2 a

nd 3 but to provide a concrete response to the practical challenges that the age

assessment process raises. In light of this, the recommendations are grouped with the topic and practical

challenge they intend to respond to, as follows:

Praccal

challenge(s)

Recommendaons

Topic

EASO key recommendations

A. Topic Practical implementation of the best interests of the child

Praccal challenge Irregular implementation of the principle throughout the EU+ territory

EASO recommends 1. A BIA should be conducted to ensure that the parcular age assessment

process considered is compable with the individual circumstances of the

applicant and that the expected outcome is benecial to the process and not

harmful for the child.

2. The BIA should verify that all the safeguards are in place and that the BIC are

observed:

▪

a qualified, independent representative and/or a guardian has been

appointed to act in the child’s best interests and exercise legal capacity;

▪

procedures are shouldn't be hyphenated and are conducted by qualified

professionals;

▪

age-appropriate information on the process is provided on a regular basis,

as well as on its implications and the right to refusal in simple terms and in a

culturally sensitive manner — under supervision, cultural mediation may be

of use;

▪

applicant’s views are gathered and taken into consideration according to his

or her age and maturity;

▪

benefit of the doubt is applied before, during and after the process until

conclusive results are reached;

▪

informed consent is obtained at least for medical examinations, the right

to refuse medical examinations is respected and reasons for a refusal are

explored — in particular it is recommended that consent is obtained and

documented (in writing and any other form of evidence) from the child and

the guardian as appropriate;

▪

confidentiality, data protection and safety are considered;

▪

the least intrusive method is selected to ensure that the least intrusive

process is applied following a gradual implementation;

▪

the most accurate method is selected and margin of error is documented;

▪

an effective remedy is available.

Final recommendaons EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 61

B. Topic Motivation/necessity of the assessment

Practical challenge The need for age assessment should be justified and substantiated based

erious doubts

EASO recommends 1.

e assessment should not be conducted as a roune pracce. The need for

and benets of the parcular age assessment process must be assessed and

documented.

2. Exhaust all sources of informaon at disposal before deciding to undertake an

age assessment.

3. Consider all evidence in conjuncon with a wider range of factors (physical,

psychological, developmental, environmental and cultural factors, gender) to

save the need for later age assessment.

sume that the applicant is a child (benet of the doubt) while there are

doubts on the applicant’s age.

plicants should not bear the nancial cost of the assessment.

C Topic Qualified professionals

Practical challenge Specialisation in age assessment is not always available

EASO recommends 1.

ofessionals should be specialists not only in the eld of the method

considered but also in its specic applicaon for age assessment purposes.

Professionals should receive connuous training in the latest developments

of the method, in child rights and in how to conduct the examinaons in a

gender- and culturally sensive manner.

2. In

disputed cases, the examiners can refer the case to a supervisor or to a

coordinang and muldisciplinary panel.

3. Personnel responsible for determining the age should be properly trained to

understand the results and the margin of error it contains.

D. Topic Intrusiveness

Practical challenge No consensus on the intrusiveness of the different methods

Some methods in use are physically or psychologically intrusive

EASO recommends 1. First analyse any exisng evidence before deciding to undertake further

assessment�

2. On

ce age assessment is deemed to be necessary, apply non-medical methods

rst and then medical methods only if doubts remain. In such cases, radiaon-

free methods should be applied rst and only as a last resort can other

methods involving radiaon be considered.

thods should be selected according to the special circumstances or needs

of the individual case (gender, range of presumed age) and the process should

be respecul of the ethnic and cultural background of the child.

4. Any method involving nudity or the examinaon, observaon or measurement

of genitalia or inmate parts should not be used for age assessment purposes.

62 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Final recommendaons

E. Topic Accuracy of the methods and/or the process

Practical challenge None of the methods can currently determine the exact age of a person

Documenting and interpreting the margin of error

EASO recommends 1. Apply benet of the doubt and consider the applicant a child as soon as

doubts on the age of the applicant are raised and unl conclusive results are

obtained.

2. Explore dierent aspects involving psychological and physical development as

part of the process to improve the accuracy so that the decision is based on a

wider range of evidence.

alied and experienced professionals should regularly demonstrate their

prociency and are specially trained on cultural diversity and special needs of

children.

enever possible, refer the dicult cases to a competent centre for further

consultaon.

5. Ac

cept the applicant’s claimed age when it falls within the range determined

by the age assessment. Otherwise, the lowest age of the segment should be

selected as a result.

6. Ac

knowledge the margin of error and apply benet of the doubt.

e margin of error should be documented and included in the results,

communicated to and understood by the determining authority.

F. Topic Multidisciplinary and holistic approach

Practical challenge The multidisciplinary and holistic approach is not broadly applied

EASO recommends 1.

alyse dierent aspects (assessing both psychological and physical

development and not resorng only to medical methods) as part of the

muldisciplinary process to improve the accuracy so that the decision is based

on a wider range of evidence.

2. Involve experts in dierent aspects of development and in how to assess the

age within their eld of experse.

se the decision on the conclusion of a panel of experts with muldisciplinary

specialisaon when several methods were applied.

4. Se

t up coordinaon mechanisms for the praccal implementaon of a

muldisciplinary approach.

G. Topic Repetitive assessments on the same applicant in different EU+ states

Practical challenge Age assessments conducted in other EU+ states are not always recognised

EASO recommends 1.

en available, the results of age assessments conducted by other EU+

ates

should be recognised in order to avoid unnecessary assessments, especially in

Dublin cases.

e informaon on age assessment transferred to another EU+ state should

be complete, including reference to the methods applied and the reasoning

leading to the nal outcome.

Final recommendaons EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 63

H. Topic Refusal to undergo age assessment

Practical challenge Risk of automatic consideration as an adult

EASO recommends 1.

asons for refusal should be explored and when possible the assessment

should be adjusted so consent can be obtained.

2. The refusal should not automacally lead to a conclusion poinng to

adulthood.

I. Topic Effective remedy

Practical challenge Results from age assessments are not always subject

to administrative/judicial review

EASO recommends 1.

e decision on age assessment should be issued before the decision on the

internaonal protecon applicaon is made, as the consideraon as an adult

or a child may inuence the asylum procedure.

2. This decision should be subject to an administrave/judicial review.

64 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 1 Glossary

Annex 1 Glossary

This glossary aims to identify and/or develop a common understanding of the most relevant terms used in

the age assessment process. In addition, it includes terms that are mentioned in the narrative of the guide

although they are not further explored in the publication (for example the best interests determination,

burden of proof, etc.). The purpose of the definitions compiled in the glossary is to serve as a source of

reference for the relevant actors in the age assessment field, such as EU+

ates’ policymakers, experts

conducting the examinations, officials and a panel of experts evaluating the results or other practitioners

in general.

Term Denion Source

Accuracy The quality or state of being correct or precise

The degree to which a measurement, or an estimate

based on measurements, represents the true value of the

attribute being measured.

Additional information

There is no age assessment method that can provide

accurate results on the chronological age of the person.

For this reason the preferred term is age assessment and

not age determination.

In the context of medical examinations being used as

methods to assess the age, there are some requirements

to be fulfilled by the reference studies to be considered

accurate:

—

equate sample size,

—

rified ages of test persons,

—

uni

form age distribution,

—

paration by gender,

—

tails of date of examination,

—

ear definition of characteristics studied,

—

act description of methodology,

—

tails on reference population relative to genetic–

geographic origin,

—

cioeconomic status, state of health,

—

tails of group size, mean or median value and a

measure of variation for each,

—

aracteristic studied.

Oxford online dictionary

https://en.oxforddictionaries.

com/definition/accuracy

Medical online dictionary

http://medical-dictionary.

thefreedictionary.com/

accuracy

Schmeling et al.,

011.

Annex 1 Glossary EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 65

Term Denion Source

Age The length of time that a person has lived or a thing has

existed.

Additional information: for the purpose of this tool, age is

an essential element of a child’s identity, as the Convention

on the Rights of the Child defines childhood by reference

to age.

Chronological age is measured in years, months and days

from the moment when the person was born.

Biological age is defined by an individual’s present position

with respect to his or her potential lifespan, meaning that

an individual may appear to be younger or older than his or

her chronological age.

Social age is defined by an individual’s roles,

responsibilities and habits with respect to other members

of the society of which he or she is a part. An individual

may therefore be older or younger depending on the

extent to which he or she shows the age-graded behaviour

expected of him by his particular society or culture.

Psychological age is defined by the behavioural capacities

of individuals to adapt to changing demands and includes

the use of adaptive capacities of memory, learning,

intelligence, skills, feelings, motivations and emotions for

exercising behavioural control and self-regulation.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.

com/definition/age

Settersen et al., 1997:240

Smith, T. and Brownlees, L.,

Unicef, 2011, pp.

-8.

Age assessment The process by which authorities seek to establish the

chronological age or range of age of a person in order to

establish whether an individual is a child or an adult.

UN Committee on the

Rights of the Child General

Comment No 6

EMN Glossary

(Minimum)

Age of criminal

responsibility

The minimum age below which children shall be presumed

not to have the capacity to infringe the penal law.

Article 40(3) of CRC

Benefit of

the d

oubt

A legal principle that allows the authorities to accept/

assume the applicant’s statements as material facts in the

event of uncertainty, unless proven otherwise.

If there is a possibility that the individual is a child, she or

he should be treated as such.

If after conducting the age assessment MS are still in doubt

concerning the applicant’s age, they shall assume that the

applicant is a minor.

EASO’s definition

UN Committee on the

Rights of the Child, General

Comment No

rticle 25(5) APD

66 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 1 Glossary

Term Denion Source

Best interests

assessment

(BIA)

(a) A unique activity that should be undertaken in each

individual case, in the light of the specific circumstances of

each child or group of children or children in general. These

circumstances relate to the individual characteristics of the

child or children concerned.

(b) Consists of evaluating and balancing all the elements

necessary to make a decision in a specific situation for a

specific child or group of children.

what immediate actions are in an individual child’s best

interests, e.g. protection and care interventions. They are

holistic and conducted by staff with relevant professional

expertise.

Additional information

According to the EU asylum acquis, when assessing the

best interests of the child, MS shall in particular take due

account of the following:

(a) family reunification possibilities;

(b) the minor’s well-being and social development, taking

into special consideration the minor’s background;

there is a risk of the minor being a victim of human

trafficking;

(d) the views of the minor in accordance with his or her age

and maturity.

The concepts of best interests assessment (BIA) and best

interests determination (BID) can be understood as part

of the same process, which starts in principle as soon as

an unaccompanied or separated child is discovered and

ends when the child has obtained a durable solution to her

or his situation of separation and of displacement from

country of origin or place of habitual residence.

(a) and (b) UNCRC, General

Comment No 14, 2013,

http://www.refworld.org/

docid/51a84b5e4.html

http://www.refworld.org/

docid/5423da264.html

UNCRC, General Comment

, paragraph 31

Article 3 and Article 3(1) CRC

Recitals 9 and 22, Article 2(j)

and Article 23(2) RCD

Recital 33 and

Article

5(6)

Recitals 18, 19 and 38

and Article 20(5) and

Article

Recital 35 Eurodac regulation

Recital 13 and Article 6

Dublin regulation

Article 24, EU Charter of

Fundamental Rights

UNHCR, Safe and Sound,

http://www.refworld.org/

docid/5423da264.html

Best interests

of the child

(a) is a threefold concept: a substantive right, a

fundamental and interpretative legal principle and a rule

of procedure aimed at ensuring both the full and effective

enjoyment of all the rights recognised in the Convention on

the Rights of the Child and the holistic development of the

child;

(b) is the well-being of the child: in a broad sense this

includes their basic material, physical, educational and

emotional needs as well as needs for affection and safety.

(a) UNCRC, General

Comment No

4, 2013,

http://www.refworld.org/

docid/51a84b5e4.html

(b) UNHCR, Guidelines

on Determining the Best

Interests of the Child, http://

www.unhcr.org/4566b16b2.

pdf

Best interests

determination

(BID)

The formal process with strict procedural safeguards

designed to determine the child’s best interests for

particularly important decisions affecting the child that

will have a fundamental impact on the child’s future (i.e.

durable solutions), including identifying a durable solution.

Due to the magnitude of the decision, BID requires in-

depth information accumulated in the course of the best

interests process about the child.

UNCRC, General Comment

14, 2013, http://

www.refworld.org/

docid/51a84b5e4.html

UNHCR Safe and Sound,

http://www.refworld.org/

docid/5423da264.html

Annex 1 Glossary EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 67

Term Denion Source

Burden of proof

or duty to

substantiate

In the international protection context, the burden of

proof is a concept that encompasses, on the one hand, the

duty of the applicant to substantiate his/her application

and on the other hand the duty of investigation placed on

the asylum authority. In that sense, it is a shared burden

of proof, and the principle of cooperation underlies both

elements�

pending on individual and contextual circumstances, the

authorities may assume a greater investigative burden.

EASO evidence assessment

module

Recital 25, Articles 12(a) 13 (a)

and 25 (5)APD, Article 4 (1) QD

Additional information

Although the burden of proof usually is shared between

the examiner and the applicant in adult claims, it may be

necessary for an examiner to assume a greater burden of

proof in children’s claims, especially if the child concerned

is unaccompanied. If the facts of the case cannot be

ascertained and/or the child is incapable of fully articulating

his/her claim, the examiner needs to make a decision on

the basis of all known circumstances, which may call for a

liberal application of the benefit of the doubt. Similarly, the

child should be given the benefit of the doubt should there

be some concern regarding the credibility of parts of his/

her claim.

UNHCR: Note on Burden and

Standard of Proof in Refugee

Claims, 16

ecember 1998.

See also, UNHCR, The Heart

of the Matter — Assessing

Credibility when Children

Apply for Asylum in the

European Union, December

2014: http://www.refworld.

org/docid/55014f434.html

[accessed 2 July 2017]

Child/minor Is every human being below the age of 18 years Article 2(6) ATD

Article 2(d) RCD

Article 2(l) APD

Article 2(k) QD

Article 2(i) Dublin III

regulation

Article 2(f) FRD

Based on Article 1

, UN

Convention on the Rights of

the Child (UNCRC), 1989

Country

of origin

information

(COI)

Information used by the MS authorities to analyse the

socio-political situation in countries of origin of applicants

for international protection (and, where necessary, in

countries through which they have transited) in the

assessment, carried out on an individual basis, of an

application for international protection.

EASO COI report

methodology

EMN Glossary

Computed

(axial)

tomography

(CT/CTA)

An imaging procedure that uses special X-ray equipment to

create detailed pictures, or scans, of areas inside the body

Radiology Info https://

www.radiologyinfo.org, a

public information resource

developed by physicians from

the Radiological Society of

North America (RSNA) and

the American College of

Radiology (ACR)

Consent Informed, free and voluntary agreement. The consent of

the child, and his or her representative or guardian in case

of unaccompanied or separated children, is required for

medical examinations to conduct the age assessment

Article 25(5) APD

UN High Commissioner

for Refugees (UNHCR),

Field Handbook for

the Implementation of

UNHCR BID Guidelines,

November

011, available at:

http://www.refworld.org/

docid/4e4a57d02.html

68 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 1 Glossary

Term Denion Source

Cultural

mediators

Professionals with a profound knowledge of community

traditions who render interventions more culturally

appropriate and bridge gaps between the cultural and

professional cannons.

Based on Al-Krenawi, A. and

Graham J. R., 2001.

Guardian (a) Guardianship refers to the designation of responsibility

to an adult or organisation for ensuring that a child’s best

interests are fully represented.

(b) A guardian is considered to be an independent person

who safeguards the child’s best interests and general well-

being, and to this effect complements the limited legal

capacity of the child, when necessary, in the same way that

parents do (FRA definition).

Additional information

A guardian serves as a key procedural safeguard to ensure

respect for the best interests of an unaccompanied or

separated child.

(a) Inter-agency Working

Group on Unaccompanied

and Separated Children,

Inter-agency guiding

principles on unaccompanied

and separated children, 2004,

http://www.refworld.org/

docid/4113abc14.html

(b) UNCRC, General Comment

No 6, 2005

Children Deprived of Parental

Care, 2014, http://fra.europa.

eu/en/publication/2014/

guardianship-children-

deprived-parental-care-

handbook-reinforce-

guardianship

Inter-observer

reliability

Refers to statistical measurements that determine how

similar the data collected by different observers are.

Additional information

It is important for the observers to have as close to the

same observations as possible — this ensures validity in

the experiment. If the raters significantly differ in their

observations then either measurements or methodology

are not correct and need to be refined.

Based on Russell K. Schutt’s

book, Investigating the

social world: the process

and practice of research,

University of Massachusetts

Boston, eighth edition, 2015.

Intra-observer

reliability

The ability to consistently get the same results when the

same observer is making observations at different times.

Additional information

For example, a doctor with good intra-observer reliability

skills would read a patient’s X-ray or medical diagnostic

test the same way when viewing it several weeks later.

Intra-observer reliability is also called self-reliability or

intra-rater reliability.

Based on Russell K. Schutt’s

book, Investigating the

social world: the process

and practice of research,

University of Massachusetts

Boston, eighth edition, 2015.

Annex 1 Glossary EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 69

Term Denion Source

Intrusive/

invasive

The term invasive is commonly used in medical procedures

to indicate introduction of instruments or other objects

into the body or body cavities, implying even cutting

tissues.

The term intrusiveness can refer to a behaviour, act,

state or disposition towards being intrusive (annoying

someone or make them feel uncomfortable), interrupting

and disturbing to others, invading their personal space or

interfering in their private life.

Additional information

Invasiveness can be used as a synonym of intrusiveness,

thus both terms can be interchangeable in this context.

Since the negative effects of the age assessment methods

do not always imply the abovementioned physical effects

related to invasiveness (introduction of instruments or

other objects into the body or body cavities, implying

even cutting tissues) but can imply the intrusion on

one’s privacy, the preferred term in this publication is

intrusiveness owing to its broader spectrum.

Online Oxford dictionary

definition

https://en.oxforddictionaries.

com/definition/us/invasive

Medical

examinations

For the purpose of this tool, medical examinations are

the examinations, check-ups or assessments conducted

by medical professionals (doctors, radiologists, general

practitioners or paediatricians, etc.)

EASO’s definition

Representative A person or an organisation that assists and represents an

unaccompanied child in the asylum procedure, ensuring

the of the child and exercising legal capacity for the child

where necessary.

Additional information

Representatives or legal representatives differ from the

qualified lawyer or other legal professionals who provide

legal assistance, speak on behalf of the child and legally

represent him or her in written statements and in person

before administrative and judicial authorities in criminal,

asylum or other legal proceedings as provided in national

law.

Based on Article 24(1) RCD

recast and Article 25(1) APD

recast.

FRA, Guardianship for

Children Deprived of Parental

Care, 2014.

http://fra.europa.eu/

en/publication/2014/

guardianship-children-

deprived-parental-care-

handbook-reinforce-

guardianship

Unaccompanied

child or minor

A child/minor who arrives in the territory of the Member

States unaccompanied by an adult responsible for him

or her whether by law or by the practice of the Member

States concerned, and for as long as he/she is not

effectively taken into the care of such a person/adult; it

includes a child/minor who is left unaccompanied after he

or she has entered the territory of the Member States.

Article 2(e) RCD

Article 2(m) APD

Article 2(l) QD

Article 2(j) Dublin III

regulation

Article 2(f) FRD

UNCRC, General Comment

No 6, 2005

UNHCR, Safe and Sound,

p. 22, http://www.refworld.

org/docid/5423da264.html

Validation

study

Works consisting of research using processes by which

the reliability and relevance of a procedure for a specific

purpose are established.

Encyclopaedia of medical

concepts

http://www.reference.md/

files/D023/mD023361.html

70 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 1 Glossary

Term Denion Source

Separated

children

Children who have been separated from both parents,

or from their previous legal or customary primary care-

giver, but not necessarily from other relatives. These may,

therefore, include children accompanied by other adult

family members.

UNCRC, General Comment

No 6, 2005

UNHCR, Safe and Sound,

�

Trafficking of

children

Trafficking of children is the recruitment, transportation,

transfer, harbouring or reception of children, including

the exchange or transfer of control over children, for the

purpose of exploitation.

In contrast with the exploitation of adults, when the

subjects of exploitation are children it will be a punishable

crime even without using the threat of or use of coercion,

abduction, fraud, deception, the abuse of power, the abuse

of a position of vulnerability, payments or benefits to

achieve the consent of a person.

Additional information

Although child smuggling has similarities with child

trafficking, the two types of criminal activities should not

be confused.

• Smuggling of children is the criminalised activity of

facilitation of irregular entry into a country irregularly

(often involves payment). The purpose of trafficking is

to exploit a child and it is regarded as a crime against

the person�

• Tr

afficking is generally carried out with the use of

coercion and/or deception, etc. With smuggling it is the

opposite.

• Tr

afficking involves the intention to exploit the child

victim subsequent to their arrival in a state, whereas

the role of the smuggler usually ends as soon as the

child reaches his or her country of destination.

•

afficking can take place both within and across

national frontiers, whereas international movement is

required for smuggling.

•

A ch

ild’s entry into a state can be regular or irregular in

the case of trafficking, whereas smuggling is generally

characterised by irregular entry.

Child trafficking is not solely a trans-border crime; as

the purpose of the criminal activity is the exploitation of

children, children might be trafficked even within national

borders.

Article 2(5) ATD

Frontex, VEGA Handbook:

Children at Airports, 2015

http://frontex.europa.eu/

assets/Publications/Training/

VEGA_Children_Handbook.pdf

Annex 2 The best interests of the child and age assessment: praccal tools EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 71

Annex 2 The best interests of the child and

age assessment: praccal tools

Since the main focus of this publication is the primary consideration of the best interests of the child when

deciding to undertake an age assessment for the particular child, and how to conduct a safe process when

necessary, EASO has developed the following practical tools to support those responsible for assessing if

the process respects the child’s best interests.

� T

he best interests assessment form (BIA form) is designed to ensure that all key steps are completed

by the responsible authorities or a party delegated by the authorities, and appropriately considered

when assessing the need to undergo an age assessment. In that sense, the BIA form intends to

serve as a supporting document to enable the assessor to verify that the relevant information and

safeguards have been considered before making a decision to undertake an age assessment.

The BIA form is structured as follows.

□ Collected information.

□ Preconditions for the process.

□ A list of factors to be given due weight when deciding on the suitability of the process for the

individual child or the necessary adjustments to be made.

□ BIA outcome: result of the best interests assessment of the potential age assessment process (age

assessment to be done, not to be done, or on hold).

A s

econd tool, the best interests of the child in the age assessment (BIC checklist), has been

designed to ensure that the procedural safeguards are respected and in place throughout the

age assessment process. In light of this, the second checklist is to be used throughout the age

assessment process.

□ The BIC checklist encompasses a compilation of safeguards and the relevant aspects to comply with

the best interests and other rights of the child when assessing the age of the child.

The tools have been designed with the assumption that the assessments will be conducted by trained

asylum officers with child-specific expertise and experience, or an alternative trained party designated

by the determining or other authority to be used and looked at in conjunction with EU, international and

national legislation.

It should be noted that the focus of the BIC tools and the guidance provided in this publication is

only limited to the age assessment process while the BIA is to be considered until a durable solution

is found for the child. Consequently, this best interests assessment does not intend to replace a best

interests determination (BID), which will be required when durable solutions for the child are under

consideration.

72 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 2 The best interests of the child and age assessment: praccal tools

IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS WHEN ASSESING THE BIC FOR THE PURPOSES OF AGE ASSESSMENT

Children have the right to be heard in all decisions that affect their life. It is important to consider the

child’s opinions, feelings and thoughts when conducting a BIA. The guardian/representative has a key

role in ensuring that the child is adequately informed and understands the procedures and processes

and the possible outcomes. Some important aspects to consider are as follows.

▪

Information should be given in a simple, straightforward and clear way. A child’s understanding

needs to be checked, as some children might fear any authority figure and not dare to ask questions

or admit not understanding due to their age, cultural background or psychological state.

▪

The assessors should proactively seek to obtain information from relevant sources for the

purpose of the assessment, in particular from those knowledgeable about the child’s situation

(such as the guardian/representative, current caretaker, social workers at the reception centres,

representative, family members, etc.), and therefore the contact details of the relevant parties

should be collected as required, prior to the BIA.

▪

The BIA should also take into account any existing report regarding the child, such as medical

reports, vulnerability assessments or any other documents made available at any point during

the process, prior to the BIA.

▪

BIA is an individual assessment and should be separated for each Child. It should be conducted

in a confidential and child-friendly environment that helps to build trust with the child. The

officials and interpreters are bound by confidentiality, the concept of which should also be

explained to and understood by the child.

▪

The child should feel at ease. The competent officer and interpreter should be as informal and

empathetic as possible.

▪

If the child so wishes, and if possible, the BIA interviews with the child could be done by an

official and interpreter of the gender preferred by the child.

▪

If the child might experience trauma, s/he may not be willing to express any feelings or opinions.

Expert interviewers should be sought to use alternative interview methods and to provide

counselling.

▪

It is important to explain to the child that their wishes may not all be fulfilled but if possible they

will guide the process while the ultimate decision will depend on the circumstances of the case.

Annex 2 The best interests of the child and age assessment: praccal tools EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 73

A. The best interests assessment form

BIA form

BASIC DETAILS

Case/file number

Applicant

Guardian/representative

Assessor

Interpreter

Date

COLLECTED INFORMATION

Biodata collected (nationality, ethnicity, education, language, health, family history)

Information about the age from other family members or other sources collected

Expert reports included (medical reports, administrative reports, etc.)

If any of the above information not available or not collected, explain why:

Additional or new information:

PRECONDITIONS FOR THE AGE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

The individual has applied for international protection.

The age of the applicant has not been established.

All the available evidence available has been collected and taken into consideration, including the

results from the identification and, when needed, assessment of vulnerabilities, health concerns,

influence on the assessment, mental/legal capacity and fitness for an age assessment.

A rest and recovery period has been granted, in particular in cases where the applicant shows signs of

trauma or former abuse.

The benefit of the doubt is applied.

There are substantiated doubts about the applicant’s claimed age.

Please specify:

A qualified, independent representative and/or a guardian has been appointed and is involved in the process.

Age-appropriate information on the process is provided on a regular basis, as well as information on

its implications and right of refusal in simple terms and a culturally sensitive manner.

The applicant’s views are gathered and taken into consideration according to his/her age and maturity.

Interpretation is available throughout the process.

If any of the preconditions are not met, explain why:

Follow-up action if required:

RELEVANT FACTORS TO ASSESS IF THE AGE ASSESSMENT IS IN THE CHILD’S BEST INTERESTS

The established age assessment is based on a holistic and multidisciplinary approach allowing for

adaptation to the applicant’s needs and particular circumstance, gender, cultural background and

other vulnerabilities.

Informed consent is obtained at least for medical examinations, and documented (in writing and any

other form of evidence from the child and the guardian as appropriate); or

the right to refuse medical examinations is respected, and reasons for a refusal are explored.

The least intrusive process is established following a gradual implementation.

Confidentiality, data protection and safety are considered.

Officials and experts are experienced in working with children and appropriately trained.

The least intrusive method will be selected.

The most accurate method will be selected and the margin of error is acceptable for this applicant

(range of age in question, gender, etc.).

The expected outcome is beneficial to the process and not harmful for the child.

An effective remedy is available.

OPTION 1

It is in the best interests of the applicant to be have his her age assessed

Details: (explain reasons for the recommendation)

OPTION 2

The age assessment process is not in the applicant’s best interests

Details: (explain reasons for the recommendation)

74 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 2 The best interests of the child and age assessment: praccal tools

OPTION 3

The applicant’s age assessment should be temporarily on hold due to

Details: (explain reasons for the recommendation)

Name

Organisation

Date

Signature

ASSESSMENT APPROVED BY

Name

Organisation

The result of the assessment (option 1, 2 or 3) shall condition the decision to undertake or not the age

assessment and as such be recorded in the file. Once deemed necessary (after the evaluation of the doubt)

age assessment must be conducted in line with applicable safeguards, taking into account the individual

circumstances of the applicant and the EASO recommendations.

Annex 2 The best interests of the child and age assessment: praccal tools EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 75

B. The best interests of the child checklist for the purpose of age assessment

BIA checklist

It is in the best interests of the child to conduct an age assessment (opon 1 as per the previous BIA form).

BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT

▪

From the moment there are reasons to believe that a person could be a child, the applicant is treated

as such throughout the asylum procedure and the age assessment.

▪

When the results of the examinations are inconclusive, the applicant is considered as a child.

REPRESENTATIVE/GUARDIAN

▪

A qualified and independent representative or guardian is appointed before age assessment and is

present with the applicant’s agreement and involved in the process.

▪

The role and responsibilities (ensuring the ‘best interests of the applicant’, and exercising legal

capacity) are explained to and understood by the representative/guardian and the applicant.

▪

The representative/guardian is present during the BIA interview when the applicant wishes it so.

▪

The representative/guardian is duly informed, has a good understanding of the age assessment

process and his or her questions are clarified.

▪

The representative/guardian can stop the age assessment if felt to be inappropriate and in the best

interests of the applicant.

▪

The representative/guardian is informed about the results and understands how they can be

challenged.

IF THE APPLICANT SHOWS INDICATORS OF TRAUMA OR VICTIMS OF ABUSE

▪

After assessing the psychological and physical condition the applicant is considered fit to undergo an

age assessment with the necessary adjustments.

▪

The following aspects are considered when establishing the particular age process.

•

y examination involving the exhibition, observation or measurement of intimate parts is totally

precluded.

• The recording of past events or the reconstruction of life history may not be effective due to

memory gaps and it can be very distressful for the applicant.

• Age assessment methods assessing psychological development may not be suitable if they are

not conducted by a trained and experienced specialist.

• Age assessment methods assessing physical development may be distressful or particularly

intrusive for victims of abuse.

▪

Alternative methods or techniques adapted to the special needs of the applicant are available.

▪

The benefit of the doubt is largely applied.

▪

A rest and recovery period is guaranteed and extended when necessary.

▪

A person of trust is allowed to follow the process with the applicant, prior to verifying the suitability

of the person.

▪

Officials and experts particularly trained in dealing with particularly vulnerable persons are selected.

INFORMATION

The applicant and representative/guardian are informed about the following.

▪

The existence and reasons for the doubts and who is responsible for providing the information in a

child-friendly manner orally and in writing in a language they could understand.

▪

The possibility that the age may be assessed by an age assessment (and what that means in practice,

including a description of the different examinations, whether medical or non-medical).

▪

Information on the method and on the process (what methods are being used, why these specific

methods are preferred, the accuracy and intrusiveness of the method, the impact and potential risks

to health that the specific method may have and the roles of professionals involved).

▪

The rights and obligations derived from the process, in particular the following.

• The right to refuse to undergo medical examination and its consequences.

• The possibility to challenge the results of the age assessment and the next steps to follow.

• Possible consequences of the result of the examination for the international protection

procedure.

The information provided is understood by the applicant and the guardian/representative, and this

information provision is documented in the file.

76 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 2 The best interests of the child and age assessment: praccal tools

Best interest of the child checklist for the purpose of age assessment (page 2 out of 3)

THE APPLICANT’S VIEWS ARE HEARD

▪

After explaining in a constructive and empathetic manner the reasons why the claimed age is in

doubt:

•

in c

ase of possible inconsistencies about the age;

•

in c

ase of new documentation or evidence relevant to age assessment;

• in case of a refusal to undergo a medical examination;

•

ce the age assessment is concluded and if the results differ from the claimed age;

▪

the applicant is given the opportunity and the means to challenge the decision, and therefore to be

heard.

INFORMED CONSENT — applicant and/or guardian/representative

▪

Taking into consideration health/education/maturity, the applicant is in a position to give informed

consent.

▪

The applicant is involved in the decision to undertsake the age assessment in accordance with his/

her maturity, including consultation of their view and/or that of their guardian or representative.

▪

Consent for a medical examination is obtained where this will be part of the age assessment.

▪

It is possible to withhold consent if it is believed the process is not in the best interests of the

applicant.

CONSEQUENCES OF REFUSAL

▪

The applicant has the opportunity to refuse the process and the reasons for refusing are explored.

▪

The refusal is supported by the guardian/legal representative.

▪

It has been clearly established that a decision to reject an application for asylum/international

protection is not based solely on the applicant’s refusal to undergo age assessment.

▪

The refusal does not lead to an automatic assumption of adulthood.

HOLISTIC AND MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH

▪

The process takes into consideration the needs and special circumstances of the applicant and is

adapted when necessary (depending on the range of age, gender, ethnicity, cultural background of

the person, vulnerability and other needs).

▪

The process avoids unnecessary examinations. If doubt remains, medical methods are used after

exhausting other non-medical alternatives.

▪

If age assessment is needed, the process combines methods assessing different types of

development (maturity, psychological and physical development, behaviour, etc.).

▪

The assessment is conducted by experts with a multidisciplinary background on different methods if

necessary and gathering input from those interacting with the applicant.

LEAST INTRUSIVE AND MOST ACCURATE METHOD

▪

The least intrusive and most accurate methods are identified taking into account the range of age to

assess, the gender, ethnicity, cultural background, special needs and circumstances of the particular case.

▪

The examinations respect the applicant’s physical integrity and dignity.

▪

Those involved have an understanding of the culture and ethnicity of the applicant and can apply

this within the context of an age assessment.

▪

Examinations involving nudity and examinations of genital and breast development are precluded

from the process.

▪

Methods involving radiation are used as a last resort and specifically justified for the individual case.

▪

The margin of error is documented and understood by the expert or panel of experts deciding on

the final results.

▪

The applicant’s privacy and confidentiality are respected during assessment.

DATA PROTECTION

▪

For the age assessment purposes, the information about the applicant’s asylum claim, or the fact

that a claim has been made, is not disclosed to the alleged actors of persecution, or country of origin

authorities, government officials or their agents (e.g. by seeking to obtain birth certificates or other

identity documents confirming the age of the applicant).

▪

The information has been gathered fairly, lawfully and for the specific purpose of age assessment.

▪

Recording and sharing of information and evidence about any assessment of the age is in

accordance with data protection regulation.

Annex 2 The best interests of the child and age assessment: praccal tools EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 77

Best interest of the child checklist for the purpose of age assessment (page 3 out of 3)

QUALIFIED PROFFESIONALS

▪

Professionals involved in the process receive appropriate training concerning the rights and needs of

children including the best interests of the child and child development.

▪

There is no conflict of interests from those involved in the process, including those conducting the

age assessment and the guardian/representative.

▪

The necessary expertise of those in contact with the applicant (interpreters, the representative,

those undertaking age assessment) is verified.

▪

The applicant’s preferred options regarding the gender and background of the practitioners

undertaking the assessment are sought and respected.

▪

In case of a single examination, two experts agree on the results.

▪

When different examinations are deemed necessary, the panel of experts responsible for the

interpretation of the different results must have a multidisciplinary background.

DUBLIN CASES

▪

In cases of age-disputed applicants subject to the Dublin regulation, the benefit of the doubt is

applied.

▪

In cases of transfer, the information and evidence including the methods applied to assess the age

are transmitted to the responsible state, in accordance with the data protection regulation.

▪

In cases where states have come to differing conclusions about age, all available evidence is taken

into consideration before arriving at a final decision.

▪

The lowest age determined from the different examinations in the different MS is considered as the

age of the person, in line with EU legislation.

▪

In arriving at a final decision, when assessing the evidence, the responsible state takes into account:

— the resources and methods used in arriving at the age,

— the reliability and/or any indicated margin of error,

— the qualifications of those responsible for any age examination or assessment,

— any additional information available relating to age,

— any reasons and/or explanations put forward relating to the differing ages,

— the views of the applicant, particularly if the differing ages arise due to them claiming a

different age.

If after such a review, there are still doubts, the applicant is treated as a child, based on the principle of

the benefit of the doubt.

OPTIONS TO CHALLENGE

▪

The age assessment decision is in writing and orally explained to the applicant.

▪

The results and the assessed age can be reviewed if new evidence appears.

▪

The appeal/review of the age assessment decision is available to the applicant concerned and this

information is also provided to the applicant and representative/guardian.

▪

When the decision does not confirm the claimed age, the applicant and the representative/guardian

are provided with reasons clarifying the decision.

▪

In the event of a negative decision, an explanation of how it can be challenged is provided

▪

In cases of challenge or appeal, the applicant has the opportunity to express themself and have their

views taken into account.

▪

The applicant is supported by a representative in the appeal process.

If any of the above safeguards are not in place, further information should be included in the BIA report which

should also include:

— follow-up action required (if any);

— observations or concerns raised by the examiners or the panel of experts when evaluating the results from

the examinations;

— any other concern or issue regarding the child’s well-being;

— additional or new information.

78 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

This annex compiles the most relevant child-related provisions established in international and European

legal instruments, as well as the national legal framework and jurisprudence referenced by the national

authorities in the survey circulated in 2016; however, the content should not be considered exhaustive. It

also includes references to soft-law instruments and material pertinent for the age assessment purpose,

and the hyperlinks when available to ease the user’s consultation. Finally, it includes a blank section to be

completed by the users of this tool with the relevant provisions and instruments that have been developed

at the national level.

1. Internaonal legislaon

Legal instrument Rights and safeguards

Relevant article

UN Convention on the Rights of

the Child of 20

ovember 1989

(CRC)

Family Preamble

Child’s definition Article 1

Principle of non-discrimination Article 2

Best interests of the child Article 3(1), 9 (3), 18(1), 20

Right to life, survival and

development

Article 6

Registration, name, nationality and

parental care

Article 7

Preservation of identity and family

relations

Article 8

Right to maintain personal

relations and contact

Article 9

Restoring family links Arts 10, 22.2

Respect for the views of the child:

right to be heard

Article 12

Protection of all forms of violence Article 19

Care and accommodation Article 20

Refugee children and family

tracing

Article 22

Right to education Article 28

Protection from child labour Article 32

Prohibition of torture, detention as

last resort

Article 37

War and armed conflicts Article 38

Juvenile justice Article 40

UN Convention Relating to the

Status of Refugees 1951 and the

Protocol Relating to the Status of

Refugees 1967

Refugees

Unaccompanied children

Letter B (2) of the No 2

545 Final

Act of the UN Conference of

Plenipotentiaries on the status of

refugees and stateless persons.

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 79

2. EU acquis

Legal instrument Rights and safeguards

Relevant article

Treaty on European Union Rights of the child Article 3(5)

Charter of Fundamental Rights of

the European Union

Right to asylum Article 18,

Rights of the child Article 24

Schengen borders code

(Regulation 562/2006)

Child Sensitive procedural

measures for minors

Article 19 (1) f annex VII

Reception conditions directive

(Directive 2013/33/EU) recast

Minor Article 2(d)

Unaccompanied minor Article 2(e)

Family members Article 2(c)

Representative Article 2(j)

Best interests of the child and

family unity

Recital (9)

Best interests of the child Recital (22), Arts 2(j), 11.2, 23, 24

Vulnerable persons Arts 21, 22

Registration and documentation Article 6

Family tracing Article 24.3

Asylum procedures directive

(Directive 2013/32/EU) recast

Minor Article 2(l)

Unaccompanied minor Article 2(m)

Representative Article 2(n) and Article 25

Best interests of the child Recital (33), Arts 2(n), 25.1(a), 25.6

Right to information Art 25

�4

e assessment Article 25.5

Qualification directive

(Directive

011/95/EU) recast

Minor Article 2(k)

Family members Article 2(j)

Unaccompanied minor Article 2(l)

Best interests of the child and

family unity

Recital (18)

Best interests of the child Recital (19), (27), (38), Arts 20.5,

31.4-5

Right to be heard/right

to participation, right to

information

Article 22, 31

Maintaining family unity Article 23

Family tracing Article 31.5

Dublin regulation (EU

Regulation

04/2013) recast

Minor Article 2(i)

Unaccompanied minor Article 2(j)

Family members Article 2(g)

Relative Article 2(h)

Representative Article 2(k)

Best interests of the child and

family unity

Recital (16)

Best interests of the child Recital (13), (24), (35), Articles 2(k),

6, 8, 20.3

Right to information Recital (4) and Annex XI

Implementing Regulation 118/2004

Identification of family members

and relatives

Recital (35)

Family tracing, identification of

family members and relatives

Article 6(4), 8

Exchange of information on the

child

Annex VII Implementing Regulation

118/2004

80 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

Implementing Regulation 118/2014 Family tracing, identification of

family members and relatives

Article 1(7) Annex II LIST A(I),

LIST B(I)

Exchange of information on the

child

Annex VII

Information for unaccompanied

children on Dublin procedure

Annex XI

Eurodac regulation

(Regulation

03/2013) recast

Best interests of the child Recital (35)

Anti-trafficking directive

(Directive

2011/36/EU)

Identification of child victim

of trafficking and protection

measures

Recital (23)

Child Article 2.6

Vulnerability Article 2.2

Best interests of the child Recital (8), (22), (23), Arts 13,16.2

Procedural safeguards in

criminal investigations

Article 15

Protection of unaccompanied

children victims of THB

Article 16

Directive on residence permits

for victims of human trafficking

(Directive 2004/81/EC)

Unaccompanied minor Article 2(f)

Best interests of the child Article 10(a)

Identification as unaccompanied

child

Article 10(c)

Family tracing Article 10(c)

Family reunification directive

(Directive 2003/86/EC)

Unaccompanied minor Article 2(f)

Family reunification Article 2(d)

Family members Article 4

Best interests of the child Article

Restoring family links Article 4 and 10

Vulnerable persons/vulnerability Article3.9

Directive 2011/92/EU of

13 December 2011 on combating the

sexual abuse and sexual exploitation

of children and child pornography,

and replacing Council Framework

Decision 2004/68/JHA

Age of sexual consent Recital 8

Articles 2 (b), and 3(2)

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 81

3. Naonal legislaon and jurisprudence

National legislation and jurisprudence

Country

Relevant legislation Relevant jurisprudence

Austria According to Art. 13/3 Federal Act on the general rules of procedures

at the federal oce for immigraon and asylum, the Federal Oce for

Immigraon and Asylum or the Federal Administrave Court may order, in

the frame of a mulple examinaon method (Art 2/1/25 Austrian Asylum

Act 2005) also radiological examinaons, parcularly x-ray examinaons to

determine the age, if the alien does not manage to prove an alleged and

based on the results of the preliminary proceedings doubul minority, by

providing unobjeconable documents or other appropriate and equivalent

means of evidence. Any examinaon method has to be done with the least

possible level of intervenon. The cooperaon of the alien for a radiological

examinaon cannot be enforced. In case founded doubts connue aer the

examinaons to determine the age, to the benet of the alien, his minority

is to be assumed. This legal provision was originally passed in 2009 in the

former Art 15/1/6 Austrian Asylum Act 2005. Since 2014 it is regulated in

the Federal Act on the general rules of procedures at the federal oce for

immigraon and asylum.

Art 2/1/25 Austrian Asylum Act 2005 denes the mulple examinaon

method as a state of the art model to determine the age based on three

individual medical examinaons (specially physical, dental and x-ray)

examinaon.- This legal provision was passed in 2009.

Art 29/6/2 Austrian Asylum Act 2005 rules that if it is needed, the mulple

examinaon method to determine the age (Art 2/1/25 Austrian Asylum

Act 2005, Art 13/3 Federal Act on the general rules of procedures at the

federal oce for immigraon and asylum) has to be performed without any

unnecessary delay at the beginning of the admission procedure. This legal

provision was passed in 2015.

The Austrian High Administrave Court ruled that where there is not sucient

evidence to prove the alleged minor age of the applicant, the rst instance has to

mandate an age assessment determinaon. A presumpon of age solely based on the

appearance of the applicant by a legal ocer is not sucient (VwGH 16.4.2007, Ra

2005/01/0463; www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokument.wxe?Abfrage=Vwgh&Dokumentnumm

er=JWT_2005010463_20070416X00)

The Austrian High Administrave Court ruled that if the results of the invesgaon

procedure jusfy already the assumpon of the majority of the applicant, the

federal oce of immigraon and asylum is not obligated to order a mulple

examinaon method to determine the age of the applicant, nor is the principle of

benet of the doubt applicable in such cases. (VwGH 25.2.2015, Ra 2014/20/0045,

www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokumente/Vwgh/JWR_2014200045_20150225L02/

JWR_2014200045_20150225L02.pdf) The Austrian High Administrave Court ruled

that the result of the mulple examinaon method to determine the age of the

applicant is seen as a part of the whole procedure for establishing the circumstances

of the case for taking the decision. A lack of proper invesgaon or a defecve

reasoning given in the decision in relaon to the age assessment of the applicant

leads to an unlawful decision. (VwGH 25.2.2016, Ra 2016/19/0007, www.ris.bka.

gv.at/Dokument.wxe?Abfrage=Vwgh&Dokumentnummer=JWT_2016190007_20160

225L00)

Belgium

Guardianship law of 24 December 2002: creaon of the Guardianship

Service, responsible to take charge of UAMs and designate guardians.

Arcle 7 Guardianship law spulate:

§ 1. When the Guardianship service or the authories competent for asylum,

access to the territory, residence and expulsion have reasonable doubt as

to the age of the person concerned, the service Guardianship immediately

orders a medical examinaon by a doctor in order to verify whether or not

the person is younger than 18 years old.

The medical examinaon shall be carried out under the surveillance of the

Guardianship.

It should also be menoned that on 18 July 2013, the Constuonal Court claried

that the age determinaon with a view to the possible appointment of a guardian is

an applicaon of a police and security law. The service Guardianship can by no means

determine the personal status of the minor nor decide a dispute regarding a civil right.

Pursuant to Arcle 144 of the Constuon, the courts are exclusively competent for

such legal acons. Consequently, if the youngster wishes to have his or her name

and date of birth conrmed authoritavely (in regard to service Guardianship and

the immigraon authories), he or she has to iniate legal proceedings before the

competent court, pursuant to Arcle 46 of the Civil Code and/or Arcle 27 of the

Belgian Internaonal Private Law Code.

82 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

National legislation and jurisprudence

The costs of the medical examinaon are at the expense of the requesng

authority. If the Guardianship service orders an examinaon on its own

iniave, the costs are at the expense of said service.

§ 2. When the medical examinaon shows that the person

concerned is younger than 18 years old, Arcle 8 applies.

When the medical examinaon shows that the person concerned is older

than 18 years old, the custody by the Guardianship service expires as of

right. The Guardianship service immediately informs the person concerned,

as well as the authories competent for asylum, access to the territory,

residence and expulsion and any other authority concerned.

§ 3. In case of doubt as to the result of the medical examinaon, the youngest

age is taken into consideraon.

Bulgaria LAW ON ASYLUM AND REFUGEES In force from 01.12.2002

Art. 61(3) (supplemented — SG 101/ 2015) Where any reasonable doubt has

arisen that such alien is not a minor or under the legal age, the interviewing

authority shall commission an expert opinion to establish his/her age.

There are no such rulings.

Croaa

Act on Internaonal and Temporary Protecon (Gazee No 70/2015) Not available

Cyprus The acvaon of the age assessment process is based on the following legal

provisions:

- According to Arcle 10(1)(G) of the Cyprus Refugee Laws, the Asylum

Service may use medical examinaons in order to determine the age of

the unaccompanied minor, in the framework of the examinaon of his/her

applicaon for internaonal protecon.

- Arcle 4(3)(a, b) of the Council Resoluon of 26 June 1997 provides,

in relaon to unaccompanied minors from third countries, that ‘a)

Unaccompanied applicants for internaonal protecon claiming to be

minors, have to prove their age, b) If there is no such proof or if there are

sll serious doubts, member states may esmate objecvely the age of

applicants for internaonal protecon. For this purpose, the member state

may refer the minor, with his/her approval and the approval of his/her

appointed representave, to a medical age assessment test, conducted by

specialised medical sta’.

N/A

Czech

Republic

325/1999 secon 89

326/1999 secon 124

109/2002 secon 23

Court rulings are individuals

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 83

National legislation and jurisprudence

Denmark According to The Danish Aliens Act secon 40 c (2) The Danish Naonal Police

and The Danish Immigraon Service can demand that an unaccompanied

alien stang to be minor parcipates in a medical examinaon to determine

the aliens age.

N/a

Estonia

Forensic Examinaon Act passed on 1 Jan 2002

Act on granng IP to aliens, passed on 1 July 2006

No court cases including age assessment aspects yet

Finland Medical age assessment has been in The Finnish Aliens Act since 2010.

Secon 6a says that: A medical age assessment may be carried out to

establish the age of a sponsor or an alien applying for a residence permit if

there are reasonable grounds for suspecng the reliability of the informaon

the person has given on his or her age.

- There is not ongoing legislave changes relang to age assessment in

Finland.

There is not so signicant court rulings. In general, the results of age assessment have

remained in Administrave Court, but in some individual cases the result has been

repealed.

France

Law of March 14th 2016 on the protecon of the child. The use of X-rays

is now restricted and the sexual maturity observaon is now forbidden to

assess the age of persons declaring to be under 18.

The law of 14 March 2016 completed Arcle 388 of the civil code. No case has been

made in the maer since this new law.

The most recent decision about this subject is the decision of the Rennes Court of

Appeal on 13 January 2015 (hps://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/achJuriJudi.do?oldAc

on=rechJuriJudi&idTexte=JURITEXT000030123464&fastReqId=1477313596&fastP

os=2)

–

Presentation of the situation: The concerned person declared to be born 26

October 1996 in Kinshasa; consequently a minor. A copy of a birth certificate

established on 9 August 2012 by the Mayor of the municipality of Bumbu (DRC)

was presented to justify his identity. The guardianship procedure was launched

and the President of the General Council (department) introduced a motion to

stop the supervision.

–

The analysis of the documents concluded the authenticity of the documents; but

recalled that the birth certificate was based on a simple oral declaration by the

parents and had thus no judicial value. The document was also insufficient to

determine his age due to the lack of probative value and could not justify his age

of consent. However, the use of X-rays (wrist and left hand), clinical examinations

and the analysis of the growth plates provided an age assessment.

84 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

National legislation and jurisprudence

–

In all actions, reference is made to the report of 16 January 2007 of the National

Academy of Medicine, which states that the ‘examination of the bone age thanks

to an X-ray of the wrist and left hand’ — referring to the method of the Atlas

Greulich and Pyle, remains the simplest and most reliable method. It is the

universally used. In particular, no racial differences were demonstrated to date.

The Academy stated that ‘it is very rare that the bone development and actual age

don’t match; however, when this is the case, most of those situations lead to an

underestimation of the real age.’

– All items submitted for consideration of the court prove evidence and conclude

the individual’s age of consent.

Other decisions with the same reasoning:

Court of Appeal of Rennes — 28 October 2014

hps://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/achJuriJudi.do?oldAcon=rechJuriJudi&idTexte=JU

RITEXT000029685707&fastReqId=698863264&fastPos=3

Court of Appeal of Rennes — 28 October 2014 hps://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/

achJuriJudi.do?oldAcon=rechJuriJudi&idTexte=JURITEXT000029685066&fastReq

Id=1179022326&fastPos=4

Court of Appeal of Limoges — 3 March 2014 hps://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/

achJuriJudi.do?oldAcon=rechJuriJudi&idTexte=JURITEXT000028708995&fastReqI

d=1179022326&fastPos=9

It should be noted that the law of 14 March 2016, answers the following questions:

–

X-rays are used as an alternative means, and in the case of a missing valid identity

document and when the alleged age is not certain

–

The procedure is followed by judicial authorities and after the individual’s agreement

–

The examination should be used carefully (any doubt should benefit the individual,

taking into account other medical and social data)

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 85

National legislation and jurisprudence

Germany Secon 42f Social Code VIII describes the rules for age determinaon in the

process of taking into car by the Youth Welfare Services (introduced on 1

November 2016)

http://www.bgbl.de/xaver/bgbl/start.xav?startbk=Bundesanzeiger_

BGBl#__bgbl__%2F%2F*%5B%40attr_id%3D%27bgbl115s1802.

pdf%27%5D__1467628916541

(a) Oberlandesgericht (Higher Regional Court) Karlsruhe, Decision dated 26 August

2015 — 18 UF 92/15

Headnote

1. Further investigations arising from the obligation to investigate ex officio are

conditional on doubts about the age of the subject person. If the claim to be a

minor is obviously wrong or if the subject person fails to explain the circumstances

allegedly proving his or her minor age with sufficient plausibility, the obligation to

investigate ex officio does not require ‘indiscriminate’ investigations. (Marginal

note 25)

2. While there is the principle of the benefit of the doubt which means that minor

age shall be assumed in favour of the subject person, if the doubts regarding his

or her majority of age cannot be fully dispelled; this principle does, however, only

apply if the court cannot gain reasonable certainty about the person’s actual age

after exhausting all procedurally possible and admissible investigation options as

indicated by the circumstances. (Marginal note 33)

3. On the scope of the duty to cooperate of the subject person in determining his or

her age pursuant to section 27 of the Act on Proceedings in Family Matters and in

Matters of Non-contentious Jurisdiction. (Marginal note 24)

4. On the significance and the validity of an radiographic examination of the hand

skeleton. (Marginal note 31) (Marginal note 32)

Other main points

The duty to cooperate defined in section 27 of the Act on Proceedings in Family

Matters and in Matters of Non-contentious Jurisdiction generally includes

submitting to a medical examination for verification of the claimed age, to the

extent this is not humiliating and reasonable (Concurrence with OLG Hamm, 25

February 2014, 1 UF 213/13). (Marginal note 24)

2. The medical examination required to determine the minor age of the subject as

a prerequisite for taking him or her into custody under section 42 Social Code VII

(section 62(1) of Social Code I) may consist of a radiographic examination. It is

likewise admissible to consult an already existing radiography to determine the

subject’s age (Concurrence with OVG Hamburg, 9 Feb

ruary 2011, 4 Bs 9/11JAmt

2011, 472). (Marginal note 32)

It i

s not possible to determine reliably whether an individual has reached the age of

majority by solely relying on a radiographic examination of the maturity of the hand

skeleton. (Margin note 31)

https://www.juris.de/jportal/?quelle=jlink&docid=KORE221492015&psml=jurisw.

psml&max=true

86 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

National legislation and jurisprudence

(b) Higher Administrative Court, Bremen, Decision dated 22 February 2016 — 1 B

303/15

Main points relevant for this questionnaire

• Minority of age was explicitly defined by law when section 42f of Social Code VIII

entered into force on 1 November 2015.

• The age of minority must be determined by inspecting the identification documents

(among other things the photograph must prove identity with reasonable

reliability). In the absence of identification documents the information provided

by the subject person remains. If this information is doubtful, a qualified visual

inspection must be made to assess and determine the age (outer appearance,

questioning with an interpreter, consulting any other documents, if available).

The four-eyes principle of two experienced staff members of the youth welfare

office always applies. If certain doubts regarding the subject’s self-information

remain after the visual inspection, but overall it can be assumed with reasonable

probability that he or she is of minor age, the requirements for applying the law

governing minors are met.

• The result of the qualified visual inspection may also be that majority of age must

be assumed, because the person’s outer appearance shows clear indications that

he or she is of age. Likewise an assessment of the information obtained during the

interview may lead to this result, if the subject’s statements cannot give conclusive

and credible evidence of the process of development. Blanket assertions and

incongruities in combination with the outer appearance might lead to the same

result (Bremen Higher Administrative Court, Decision dated 18 November 2015

— 2 B 221/15).

• A qualified visual inspection that takes into account more than merely external

physical characteristics, can, in fact, be a suitable method to assess and determine

a person’s age (Munich Administrative Court, Decision dated 23 September 2014

— 12 CE 14.1833).

•

If a q

ualified visual inspection fails to produce a reasonably reliable result, a

medical examination must be commissioned. The explanatory memorandum for

section 42f of Social Code VIII (Printed Matter of the Bundestag 18/6392) details

the criteria for such examination indicating that the gentlest — and to the extent

possible — the most reliable method shall be chosen.

• This staged procedure corresponds to the relevant technical standard

(Recommendations of the Working Group of the Federal Youth Welfare Offices) to

which the explanatory memorandum for § 42 of Social Code VIII made reference.

https://www.juris.de/jportal/?quelle=jlink&docid=JURE160008628&psml=jurisw.

psml&max=true

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 87

National legislation and jurisprudence

Greece

Art. 13 par 4,5, 6, 7 None

Hungary Act. LXXX of 2007 on Asylum, Governmental Decree 301/2007. (XI. 9.) on the

execuon of Act. LXXX of 2007 on Asylum,

Act. XXIX of 2016 on expert witnesses.

Ireland

Refugee Act 1996

Secon 8(5)(a) of the Refugee Act provides that, where it appears to an

authorised ocer of the Commissioner or to an Immigraon Ocer that

a person who has arrived in the State is under the age of 18 years, that

child must be referred to the Child & Family Agency (TUSLA) which will then

decide whether or not to make an applicaon for asylum on their behalf. In

the event that an applicaon is made, the Child & Family Agency (TUSLA)

plus a legal representave from the Refugee Legal Service then assists the

minor throughout the asylum process, including by accompanying them to

their interview.

Internaonal Protecon Act 2015 (not yet commenced).

Secon 14 provides, inter alia, that where it appears to an ocer referred to

in secon 13 that a person seeking to make an applicaon for internaonal

protecon, or who is the subject of a preliminary interview, has not aained

the age of 18 years and is not accompanied by an adult who is taking

responsibility for the care and protecon of the person, the ocer shall, as

soon as praccable, nofy the Child and Family Agency of that fact.

Secon 15(4) provides, where it appears to the Child and Family Agency,

on the basis of informaon, including legal advice, available to it, that an

applicaon for internaonal protecon should be made on behalf of a person

who has not aained the age of 18 years (in this subsecon referred to as

a ‘child’) in respect of whom the Agency is providing care and protecon,

it shall arrange for the appointment of an employee of the Agency or such

other person as it may determine to make such an applicaon on behalf of

the child and to represent and assist the child with respect to the examinaon

of the applicaon.

Secon 24(1) provides that the Minister, or an internaonal protecon

ocer, where he or she, with reasonable cause, considers it necessary to

do so for the purposes of determining whether an applicant referred to

in secon 15(4) has not aained the age of 18 years, may, subject to this

secon, arrange for the use of an examinaon to determine the age of the

applicant.

AM v Refugee Applicaons Commissioner

Applicant/Plain: A.M.

Respondent/Defendant:

Refugee Applicaons Commissioner

Citaon/s: [2005] IEHC 317

URL: hp://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/bce24a8184816f1580256ef30048ca50/2b

9fdc[...]

An asylum applicant claimed he was a minor at the me of his asylum applicaon. The

Refugee Applicaons Commissioner interviewed him to assess his age and assessed

him to be not under 18 years of age. The applicant was thereaer processed by

the Commissioner as an adult and was in due course issued with a negave asylum

determinaon. The applicant challenged both the age assessment and the refugee

status determinaon.

The Court quashed the decision assessing the applicant’s age nding that minimum

procedural requirements for such a procedure include:

1. that an applicant be told the purpose of the interview in simple terms;

2. that an applicant is entitled to be told in simple terms the reason or grounds why

the interviewer considers the claim to be false and given an opportunity to deal

with such matters;

3. that the applicant is entitled to be told of any reservations held by the interviewer

with regard to identity documents and is given an opportunity to deal with the

matter;

4. that if the decision is adverse to the applicant that he is clearly and promptly

informed of the decision and its reasons; and

5. that the possibility and procedure of reassessment is communicated orally and in

writing.

88 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

National legislation and jurisprudence

Secon 24(2) provides that ‘an examinaon under subsecon (1) shall be:

(a) performed with full respect for the applicant’s dignity,

(b) consistent with the need to achieve a reliable result, the least invasive

examination possible, and

registered medical practitioner or such other suitably qualified medical

professional as may be prescribed.’

Secon 24(7) provides that reasonable cause may arise based on ‘general

statements or other relevant indicaons, [that] there are reasons to have

doubts in relaon to the age of the applicant.’

Secon 24(3) provides that consent for a medical examinaon must

be obtained from either (a) the applicant, (b) the adult who is taking

responsibility for the care and protecon of the applicant or (c) an employee

or other person appointed by the Child and Family Agency who has made an

applicaon for internaonal protecon on behalf of the child.

Secon 24(4) provides that the child must be informed in a language which

he or she may reasonably be supposed to understand, of:

(a) the possibility that his or her age may be determined by examination,

(b) the method or methods of the examination,

international protection application, and

(d) the consequences of refusal on the part of the child to undergo the

examination.

The consequences of refusal to undergo the examinaon are specied in

secon 24(5), namely, that the Minister or internaonal protecon ocer

may proceed to determine whether the applicant has aained the age of 18.

Specic provisions regarding medical examinaon in respect of age-disputed

persons in the detenon context are contained in secon 25, in similar terms

to secon 24.

Secon 25 provides, inter alia, that for the purposes of paragraph (b) of

secon 20(7), the Minister may arrange for the carrying out of an examinaon

in order to determine the age of a person.

The Court found that these requirements were not met in the instant case.

Principles: Minimum procedural requirements for age assessment of minors in

the asylum process include (i) that an applicant be told the purpose of

the interview in simple terms; (ii) that an applicant is entled to be told

in simple terms the reason or grounds why the interviewer considers

the claim to be false; and to be given an opportunity to deal with such

maers; (iii) that the applicant is entled to be told of any reservaons

held by the interviewer with regard to identy documents and is given an

opportunity to deal with the maer; (iv) that if the decision is adverse to

the applicant that he is clearly and promptly informed of the decision and

its reasons; and (v) that the possibility and procedure of reassessment is

communicated orally and in wring.

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 89

National legislation and jurisprudence

Italy

Legislave decree No 142/2015, Art. 17-18-19 (implemenng

EU REG 2013/33)

Decree (under consideraon by the Council of Ministers): ‘regolamento

recante denizione dei meccanismi per la determinazione dell’età dei minori

stranieri non accompagna vime di traa, in auazione dell’art. 4, comma

2, del decreto legislavo 4 marzo 2014, n. 24’.

Art. 8, DPR 22.9.1988, n. 448 (nei processi penali, in caso di incertezza sulla

minore età il giudice dispone, anche d’ucio, una perizia) Art. 28, co. 3, D.Lgs.

286/98 (BIC) Art. 19, co. 2, le. a), D.Lgs. 286/98 (divieto espulsione minori

stranieri) Art. 19, D.Lgs. 25/2008 implemenng EU Direcve 2005/85 (age

assessment may occurred at any stage of the procedure). L’art. 4, co. 2, D.Lgs.

4.3.2014, n. 24, implemenng EU Direcve 2011/36 (denes the holisc

procedure for the age assessment; minor age assumpon in case of doubt).

In 2017 a new decree containing the procedure to be followed for assessing

the age of a UAM suspected of being vicms of tracking was approved

hp://www.gazzeauciale.it/eli/id/2016/12/22/16G00248/sg

27.01.2014 Tribunale di Torino: radiological assessment cannot exclude that — in

individual case — could emerged a margin of error of the age assessment. In case of

doubt, the minor age is prevalent

http://www.questionegiustizia.it/articolo/i-metodi-di-accertamento-dell-eta-

cronologica-dei-_05-03-2015.php

Latvia

On 19 January of 2016 a new Asylum Law of Latvia has entered into force.

According to provisions of the Asylum Law, the State Border Guard of Latvia is

responsible for acceptance of asylum seekers applicaons and performance of

related inial acvies, inter alia determinaon of asylum seeker identy.

Part 2 of Secon 7 of the Asylum Law prescribes that in idenfying an asylum

seeker and ascertaining his or her naonality, the State Border Guard has the

right to perform inspecon of the asylum seeker and his or her possessions,

and also to seize objects and documents, if they may have a signicance in

examinaon of the applicaon or if they may pose a threat to the asylum seeker

or those around him or her.

When determining medical expert-examinaon, the State Border Guard

informs the unaccompanied minor, without delay and in the presence of a

representave, in a language which he or she understands or is reasonably

supposed to understand, regarding the possibility that his or her age may be

determined in the medical expert-examinaon, regarding the course of the

expert-examinaon, and the possible impact of the results of the medical

expert-examinaon on examinaon of the applicaon, and also regarding the

consequences, which might occur if the representave of the unaccompanied

minor refuses from medical expert-examinaon.

If during the age assessment procedure the age of a person under examinaon

is not undoubtedly determined, the conclusion is being taken for the benet of

the person under examinaon — the person is considered to be a minor.

In accordance with the secon No 182 ‘Assessment of Expert Opinion’ of the

Administrave Procedure Law, a court shall assess expert opinion in accordance

with the provisions of Secon No 154, ‘Assessment of Evidence’ of this law. The

secon No 154 spulates, that a court shall assess the evidence in accordance

with its own convicons which shall be based on comprehensively, completely and

objecvely veried evidence, and in accordance with judicial consciousness based

on laws of logic, ndings of science and principles of jusce; no evidence shall have

such predetermined eect as would bind a court; a court judgment shall state why

preference has been given to certain evidence in comparison with other, and why

certain facts have been recognised as proven while other facts as not proven.

If the expert opinion is not clear enough or is incomplete, a court may order

supplementary expert-examinaon, assigning performance thereof to the same

expert.

If the expert opinion is not substanated or reasoned, or if the opinions of several

experts contradict one another, the court may order repeated expert-examinaon,

assigning performance thereof to another expert or several experts.

90 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

National legislation and jurisprudence

The condion that the representave of an unaccompanied minor has refused

from the medical expert-examinaon for determinaon of this person’s age,

cannot be the sole grounds for taking a decision to leave the applicaon of an

unaccompanied minor without examinaon or a decision to refuse to grant

refugee or alternave status. According to Arcle 3 of Regulaons No 776 of

the Cabinet of Ministers of Latvia from 7 September 2004 ‘Regulaon of the

State Forensic Medicine Center’, the State Border Guard sends request for

forensic medical examinaon, in order to determine the age of a person, to

the State Forensic Medicine Center, which performs age assessment, using

methodology registered according to laws and regulaons (‘Age Assessment

Methodology’ No 2-20/VTMEC-1/336, adopted on 07.02.2013).

Arcle 11 of the Internal Regulaon of the State Border Guard No 1 from

16.01.2015 ‘Regulaons on Acvies of Ocials of the State Border Guard in

Cases When a Foreigner Requests Asylum’ prescribes that in the case where

an asylum seeker is subjected to age assessment examinaon, then expert

opinion received shall be sent to the court for assessment in accordance

with Secon 182 of the Administrave Procedure Law.

Lithuania Law on the Legal Status of Aliens, Arcle 123 and the Order of the Minister

of Internal Aairs of the Republic of Lithuania on granng and withdrawal

of asylum in the Republic of Lithuania, Secon No 2 (104-114 paragraphs)

No naonal court rulings regarding age assessment were issued.

Luxembourg

According to Arcle 12(3) of the Revised law on asylum and other forms of

protecon, dated 5

y 2006, the Minister may order a medical examinaon

in order to determine the age of an asylum seeker. It should be said that the

determinaon of age inuences the procedure for granng internaonal

protecon. In this regard, we refer to Arcle 9(2) of the abovemenoned law,

which says that every applicant is obliged to communicate all informaon

needed for the idencaon of the righulness of the applicaon, including

the age. In case the applicant refuses the medical examinaon, he is in

default of appearance or it turns out that he is of full age, the applicant will

be informed that these circumstances will have a negave inuence on the

decision taking of the applicaon on internaonal protecon. In this case

the applicaon for internaonal protecon might be processed through the

accelerated procedure as foreseen by Arcle

of the abovemenoned

law. Henceforth he will be considered as being full of age regarding the

applicaon. The fact of failing to consent to that medical examinaon will

not prevent the Minister from rendering a decision regarding the applicaon

for internaonal protecon. Such decision however will not be exclusively

based on such a refusal.

Not available

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 91

National legislation and jurisprudence

Malta Legal Noce 243 of 2008

Legal Noce 320of 2005, Arcle 14

Not available

Netherlands

The provisions are laid down in the aliens decree (‘vreemdelingenbesluit’)

Arcle 3.109d, which came into force on 20 July 2015.

23 Oct. 2003, ABRS 200304904/1

The Minister must ensure that the assessment is performed reliably and carefully, so

that the assessment can support the conclusions. The Minister is required to enlist

an expert with the required knowledge. To ensure that the assessment has been

performed reliably and thoroughly, the Minister needs to receive a comprehensive

report for which the expert takes responsibility, even if the expert does not wish to

disclose his name.

3 Mar. 2004, ABRS 200307415/1

The report of the age assessment is regarded as an experts advice. The argument that

convenonal X-rays cannot be used to properly image the collarbone is rejected. The

research method used in the assessment is reliable.

Norway Immigraon Act, Secon 88 Age examinaon

Where, in a case concerning asylum or in a case concerning a residence

permit for a family member, it is not possible to establish with reasonable

certainty whether the foreign naonal is over or under the age of 18, the

foreign naonal may be requested to allow himself or herself to be examined

in order to determine his or her age. The result of the examinaon shall be

assessed in relaon to the other informaon in the case.

If the foreign naonal refuses to allow himself or herself to be examined,

he or she shall be made aware that this may be of signicance for the

assessment of the case.

The King may by regulaons make further provisions in respect of the

implementaon of age examinaons.

Poland

Act of 13 June 2003 on granng protecon to foreigners within the territory

of the Republic of Poland.

There are no ongoing legislave changes relang to age assessment.

Act of 13 June 2003 on granng protecon to foreigners within the territory of the

Republic of Poland.

There are no ongoing legislave changes relang to age assessment.

Portugal Law N27/2008 from 30.06 Asylum law — Arcle 28 n.3

Law N67/98 from 26.10 Law on personal data protecon

Law N45 /2004 of 19 August Establishes the legal regime of forensic medicine

Not available

92 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

National legislation and jurisprudence

Romania

Law No 122/2006 on the Asylum in Romania (published in O.J.

No 428/18.05.2006, entered into force on 16 August 2006) provides the

following:

Art. 16 ‘Guarantees concerning the unaccompanied asylum applicants

minors’

(1) The asylum applicaon of un unaccompanied minor shall be examined

with priority.

(2) The General Inspectorate for Immigraon takes measures for the

appointment in the shortest me possible of a legal representave

who assists the unaccompanied minor asylum seeker during the asylum

procedure, including for the period of procedure of the rst asylum country,

of the procedure of a safe third country, the procedure of a safe European

third country or the procedure of determinaon of the Member State

responsible, as applicable.

(2^1) The unaccompanied minor is informed immediately with regard

to the appoinng of a legal guardian. The legal guardian fulls its dues

in accordance with the best interests of the child and has the necessary

experse for this purpose.

(3) There is no need to appoint a legal representave for the asylum applicant

unaccompanied minor in case she or he shall reach the adult age in 15 days

since she or he has lodged the applicaon.

(4) The General Inspectorate for Immigraon:

(a) ensures that the legal representave is given the opportunity to inform the

unaccompanied minor about the meaning and the possible consequences of

the personal interview, and how to prepare for a personal interview.

(b) provides legal informaon procedures referred to Art. 17 (rights of the

asylum applicants) and informaon about procedures in case of withdrawing

internaonal protecon, both minor and his legal representave.

seeker, in a language the laer understands or which is reasonably assumed

that he/she understands about the possibility of performing a forensic expert

examinaon for evaluaon of age. This informaon must contain indicaons

about the medical examinaon methods, the possible consequences of the

result of this examinaon and the eects of a potenal refusal to submit to

forensic examinaon.

N/A

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 93

National legislation and jurisprudence

(4) The forensic examinaon of age evaluaon is performed with the full

observance of individual dignity of the minor, using the least invasive

methods which allow a reliable result to the extent possible.

(5) For the applicaon of the provisions in this arcle, the General Inspectorate

for Immigraon shall collaborate with the structures of the local public

administraon authories with dues in the promoon and protecon of

children’s rights, as well as with the law courts, to clarify the legal situaons

of a minor or in case he was introduced to a special protecon measure.

Art. 41 ‘Establishing the age of the asylum applicant minor alien’

(1) In case the asylum applicant declares she or he is minor and there are no

serious doubts regarding her or his age, she or he shall be considered minor.

(2) If the unaccompanied minor child cannot prove his/her age and there are

serious doubts about his/her minority, the structure specialised in asylum

issues from the General Inspectorate for Immigraon requests before the

resoluon of asylum applicaon in administrave stage, the performance

of a forensic examinaon for evaluaon of applicant’s age, with the prior

consent in wring of the minor and his/her legal representave.

(3) In case the asylum applicant and/or legal representave refuse to carry

out the medical-legal experse in order to evaluate the age and there are

not brought convincing proofs regarding her or his age, she or he shall be

considered of adult age.

(4) In the case foreseen under paragraph (3), it shall be considered that

the respecve person has reached the age of 18 at the date of lodging the

asylum applicaon.

(5) The provisions of paragraph (3) are not applied in the case in which, at

the basis of the refusal to have the forensic examinaon to determine age

carried out, there are well- founded reasons, discovered aer evaluaon by

a psychologist within the General Inspectorate for Immigraon.

(6) The interpretaon of the result of forensic examinaon for evaluaon

of the applicant’s age is made in consideraon of the principle of higher

interest of the minor.

(7) The refusal of the unaccompanied minor applicant to undergo the

forensic examinaon for evaluaon of age cannot represent the sole

reason for rejecon of his/her asylum applicaon and does not prevent the

competent authories from issuing a decision regarding his/her applicaon

for internaonal protecon.

94 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

National legislation and jurisprudence

Art. 49 ‘Forensic examinaon’

(1) When it is considered relevant for the resoluon of the internaonal

protecon applicant and if the consent of the applicant exists, the applicant

will be subjected to a forensic examinaon regarding signs of exposure in

the past to persecuon or to a serious risk.

(2) The refusal of the applicant to undergo the forensic examinaon provided

by paragraph (1) does not prevent the General Inspectorate for Immigraon

from making a decision regarding the asylum applicaon.

(3) The forensic examinaons provided by paragraph (1) are made by the

forensic instuons and their result is transmied immediately to the

General Inspectorate for Immigraon. The deducon of expenses is assured

by the Ministry of Interior by the budget alloed to the General Inspectorate

for Immigraon for this purpose.

(4) When a forensic examinaon is not made according to paragraph (1), the

General Inspectorate for Immigraon informs the applicant in wring that

he/she can make a forensic examinaon at his/her own expense regarding

signs of exposure in the past to persecuon or to a serious risk.

(5) The results of forensic examinaons provided by paragraphs (1) and (4) are

taken into account by General Inspectorate for Immigraon in corroboraon

with other elements of the applicaon for internaonal protecon for its

resoluon.

There aren’t ongoing legislave changes relang to age assessment.

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 95

National legislation and jurisprudence

Slovakia Act on Asylum 480/2002 Coll. as amended — Secon 23/7

If the Ministry has doubts about the age of an applicant, the applicant is

obliged to undergo a medical examinaon; in case of the alien pursuant

to Secon 16 Paragraph 2 it is necessary to obtain the consent of his/her

legal representave or guardian. If the medical examinaon determines

that the applicant is a full-aged person, the Ministry shall proceed with him/

her as a full-aged person, and it shall without delay inform his/her legal

representave or guardian and the competent court on the result of the

medical examinaon. If an alien refuses to undergo a medical examinaon or

if the legal representave or guardian does not agree with this examinaon, in

accordance with this Act, this alien shall be considered a full-aged person for

the purpose of the procedure. If the medical examinaon cannot determine

whether he/she is a minor or a full-aged person, in accordance with this Act

he/she shall be considered a minor for the purpose of the procedure and

legal representave and guardian shall inform the applicant without delay.

Within the instrucon pursuant to Secon 4 Paragraph 2 the Ministry shall

inform the applicant on the possibility to execute a medical examinaon to

determine his/her age, the way of its execuon, and on consequences of the

examinaon for assessment of the applicaon for granng asylum as well as

on consequences of a refusal of the examinaon.

* secon 4/2 Prior to lling in the quesonnaire, but not later than within 15

days aer commencement of the procedure, the authorised employee of the

Ministry shall instruct the applicant of his/her rights and obligaons during

the asylum procedure, of possible consequences of not fullling or violang

his/her obligaons under this Act, of the possibility of being represented

in the procedure under this Act and of access to a legal aid. The Ministry

shall also provide the applicant with informaon about non-governmental

organisaons focusing on the care of applicants and persons granted

asylum; if possible, the instrucons and informaon shall be provided in

wrien form and in a language which is supposed to be understood by the

applicant.

*secon 16/2 Legal acts on behalf of an alien who did not aain maturity

shall be performed by his/her representave at law. If such an alien stays

on the territory of the Slovak Republic without a representave at law, the

court shall appoint him/her a guardian

N/A

Slovenia

Internaonal Protecon Act (ZMZ-1) — passed in the year 2016 N/A

96 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

National legislation and jurisprudence

Spain

Spanish constuon 1978

Spanish Act 2/2009, 11 December, amending Organic Law 4/2000 on alien’s

rights and dues in Spain and social integraon.

Royal Decree 557/2011, 20 April approving the regulaon developing the

Organic law 4/2000 on alien’s rights and dues in Spain and social integraon

aer its reform made by the Organic Law 2/2009.

Spanish Law on minor’s judicial protecon 1/1996 15 January, parally

modifying the Rules of civil Law Procedure.

Civil Code

Court order of the Audiencia Provincial de Madrid (Secon 22) of 2/2/2012 on age

assessment criteria. The order considers that Madrid Regional Government Tutelary

Commission of Minors considered as a unique evidence the medical evaluaon of the

age and this assessment never takes to support accurate conclusions. So it is needed

more evidence to conclude on the age of the minor.

Sweden

Asylum claims are assessed under the Alien’s Act from 2005 (SFS 2005:716).

The act makes a dierence between the procedure for adults and children

and several regulaons are more advantageous for children. Therefore, age

assessment is needed as an important part of the examinaon of asylum

claims under the act.

On July 20, 2016, a temporary law came into force which replaces the Alien’s

Act in some parts for a period of 3 years unl July 19, 2019. The aim of the

temporary law is to limit the possibility of obtaining a residence permit in

Sweden. The act means, inter alia, that only temporary residence permits

are granted to refugees and those in need of subsidiary protecon. Minors

and families with children who applied for asylum before 24 November 2015

are exempted from the law.

On 1 May 2017, changes in the Alien’s Act and the Alien’s Ordinance came

into eect that regulate age assessment in cases where the person applied

for asylum aer 1 February 2017. The new provisions mean that the Swedish

Migraon Agency will make an age assessment in these cases where a

person declares to be under 18 years old and there is reason to queson

that statement. This age assessment will take place early in the asylum

process. The agency will make a temporary decision on the age that can be

appealed and the decision is separated from the nal decision on residence

permit. It is now also by law that applicants who have not submied enough

evidence that they are minors should be oered the opportunity to undergo

a medical age assessment. This may be done only if the applicant has given

his wrien consent. The medical age assessment will be conducted before

the temporary decision is made. The agency will ulmately decide on the

age of the applicant in connecon with the nal decision on the residence

permit case.

The most recent and signicant precedenal ruling from the Supreme Migraon

Court on the maer of age assessment is a decision from 11 February 2014 (MIG

2014:1) where the court underlines i.a. that it is the applicant who holds the burden of

proof for his or her stated age and that there is no obligaon for the Migraon Agency

to oer a medical examinaon, only an obligaon to inform about the possibility to

undergo such.

No available online link to the ruling has been found, but the decision can be found

on the Court’s Administrave website (only in Swedish) hp://www.rasinfosok.dom.

se/lagrummet/index.jsp

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 97

National legislation and jurisprudence

For cases where the person applied for asylum before 1 February 2017 there

is no specic domesc law which aims to regulate the age assessment or

when it should be conducted during the asylum process. It is basically an

evidence assessment that follows the general principles of law, burden of

proof, etc. The age assessment is ulmately conducted when the agency

makes the nal decision on the residence permit, which can be appealed.

Sweden applies a free evidence assessment which means that there are no

predetermined rules for what value a certain type of evidence has, and there

are not any rules for what kind of evidence may be submied in support of

age (it should be within reason though). In addion it can also be menoned

that there is no legal denion of identy (which includes the person’s age)

in domesc law in Sweden. It has been dened only by court rulings.

Switzerland Art. 7, 8 et 17 al. 3bis de la Loi fédérale sur l’asile (LAsi). Jurisprudence du Tribunal administraf fédéral (JICRA 2004/30 et JICRA 2005/16)

United

Kingdom

In the UK there is no direct legislaon prescribing when an age assessment

is required, or relevant, or how it is to be carried out.

Immigraon ocials at the border are permied to make an inial assessment

when an unaccompanied young person is rst encountered based on the

individual’s own statement, any documents available, and the immigraon

ocial’s assessment in person of physical appearance and demeanour. This

is not binding as it can be disputed or challenged by the individual at that

point. In addion, the immigraon ocial may request further claricaon

of the view formed of the individual’s age. In both these situaons, if there is

a challenge from the individual, or a concern by the immigraon ocial, that

the individual is under 18, then the principle of ‘the benet of the doubt’ is

applied and the individual is treated as a child. This means that they will be

transferred to the children’s services department of a local authority who

will then be asked to conduct an age assessment.

The following areas are covered by legal rulings:

Basic requirements before starng the interview

1) Th

e assessment must be carried out by two trained social workers — as specified

in:

AS v London Borough of Croydon [2011] EWHC 2091, paragraph 19

R (FZ) v London Borough of Croydon [2011] EWCA Civ 59, paragraph 2

J v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2001] EWHC 3073 (Admin), paragraph

2) An interpreter must be provided if this is necessary — as specified in R (FZ) v

London Borough of Croydon [2011] EWCA Civ 59

3) The individual must be offered the opportunity to have an independent

appropriate adult present — as specified in:

A v London Borough of Croydon [2009] EWHC 939 (Admin)

R (NA) v London Borough of Croydon [2009] EWHC 2357 (Admin), paragraph 50

R (FZ) v London Borough of Croydon [2011] EWCA Civ 59, paragraph 25

98 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

National legislation and jurisprudence

Under the UK’s children’s legislaon a child is dened as a person under the

age of 18 and there is an indirect power therefore for the local authority to

determine age in order to be certain that it is providing children’s services to

a person under 18. The means by which the local authority does this is not set

out in legislaon but the pracce has developed of using two social workers to

assess the individual and coming to a determinaon based in that assessment.

They will use their training and experience of working with young people to

come to that conclusion. Although there is no prescribed way in which local

authories must carry out age assessments, the courts have set out guidance

and minimum standards which must be observed by local authories. The key

legal judgment was one involving the London Borough of Merton (B v London

Borough of Merton [2003] EWHC 1689 (Admin)). Since this case, the courts

have further developed their view and the cumulave requirements laid down

now have to be followed in order to produce a lawful age assessment. This is

also known as a ‘Merton compliant’ age assessment or a ‘case-law compliant’

age assessment.

4) Local authorities must comply with their own guidance when carrying out the

assessment — as specified in:

A v London Borough of Croydon [2009] EWHC 939 (Admin)

R (NA) v London Borough of Croydon [2009] EWHC 2357 (Admin)

5) If the circumstances of the case are such that the individual is being reassessed

(for example, they are undergoing a second age assessment), it is preferable for

those who undertook the first assessment not to take part in the second — as

specified in R (NA) v London Borough of Croydon [2009] EWHC 2357 (Admin),

paragraphs 50 and 69.

6) Except in clear cases (where it is very obvious that a person is under or over 18

and there is normally no need for prolonged inquiry), those who are assessing age

cannot determine age solely on the basis of the appearance of the claimant — as

specified in:

Merton, paragraphs 27, 37 and 38

R (FZ) v London Borough of Croydon [2011] EWCA Civ 59, paragraph 3

The interview

Those who are assessing age must:

plain to the claimant the purpose of the interview — as specified in Merton,

paragraph 55.

ek to elicit the general background of the claimant, including the claimant’s

family circumstances and history, educational background, and the claimant’s

activities during the previous few years — ethnic and cultural information may

also be important — as specified in Merton, paragraph 37.

ke an assessment of the claimant’s credibility and ask questions to test the

claimant’s credibility if there is reason to doubt the claimant’s statement as to

their age — as specified in Merton, paragraph 37.

ve the claimant the opportunity to explain any inconsistencies in their account

or anything which is likely to result in adverse credibility findings — this is best

done as soon as possible, when matters are ‘fresh in minds’ — as specified in:

Merton, paragraph 55

R (FZ) v London Borough of Croydon [2011] EWCA Civ 59, paragraph 20

R (NA) v London Borough of Croydon [2009] EWHC 2357 (Admin), paragraph 52

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 99

National legislation and jurisprudence

5) Remember that cases vary, and the level of inquiry required in one case may not

be necessary in another — as specified in Merton, paragraph 50.

The conclusion

1) A local authority assessing age may take into account information obtained by the

Home Office, but it must make its own decision, and for that reason must have

adequate information available to it — as specified in Merton, paragraph 39.

2) A medical report is not necessary and local authorities are not required to

commission one. If submitted by the claimant, medical reports from paediatricians

do not attract greater weight than properly conducted reports from experienced

social workers, but nor can the local authority or Secretary of State for the

Home Department disregard them — they must be considered if they have been

submitted — as specified in:

Merton, paragraphs 50 and 51

A v London Borough of Croydon [2009] EWHC 939 (Admin), paragraphs 33, 34 and 47.

3) The conclusions and reasons must engage with any documents submitted by the

claimant — as specified in R (NA) v London Borough of Croydon [2009] EWHC

2357 (Admin), paragraphs 61-64.

4) Adequate reasons must be given for a decision that a claimant claiming to be a

child is not a child (though these need not be long or elaborate) — as specified in:

Merton, paragraphs 45 and 48

A v London Borough of Croydon [2009] EWHC 939 (Admin)

5) The interview must be written up promptly and notes must be accurate and

consistent — as specified in R (NA) v London Borough of Croydon [2009] EWHC

2357 (Admin), paragraphs 50 and 60 — a 2-month period between interview and

write-up was found to be contrary to current practice.

6) The absence of the time of commencement and completion of the interview in

the assessment document, or the question of breaks, does not make the process

defective, however desirable such information might be — as specified in ZS

(Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ

1137, paragraph 36.

100 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

3.(a) Naonal guidelines on age assessment

Country

AT -

BE When the UAM presents at the Immigraon Department to apply for asylum, the idencaon form will be lled out and the informaon on the identy of the UAM,

such as the claimed date and place of birth, will be registered.

If the Guardianship Service, the Immigraon Oce or the Oce of the Commissioner General for Refugees and Stateless Persons have any doubt about the person

concerned being underage, a medical age assessment can be ordered, at the expense of the authority applying for it. In case of doubt, for example related to the

minor’s physical appearance, behaviour, or way of speaking, or when no identy documents are presented or when the authencity of these documents cannot be

conrmed, an age assessment can be performed. The test is explained to the minor, with the help of an interpreter, and the minor receives an explanaon about the

test in his/her own language.

The age assessment is done by means of a medical test. The medical test is a so-called triple test:

– clinical impression of a dentist, a radiological examination of the dentition (first test),

– the hand and wrist of the non-dominant hand,

– medial ends of both collarbones (two extra tests, eventually performed after first test)

Belgium opted for a combinaon of these three tests, to increase the validity and reliability

(

). In case the three tests give dierent results, the lowest age is taken.

Furthermore, the age minus 1 standard deviaon on that parcular test is used to determine whether one is indeed below or over 18 (

). Arcle 7 of the Guardianship

Act spulates that when there is a doubt on the outcome of the medical test, the lowest age has to be taken into consideraon.

On the basis of the informaon gathered in the course of the various medical examinaons, the doctor will draw up a report, which will be sent to the Guardianship

Service that will take the decision. This decision is sent to the person in queson and to the Immigraon Oce.

Age esmaon through various disciplines is recommended by specialists such as Prof. Dr. G. Willems (KU Leuven, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Oral Health

Sciences, Centre for Forensic Odontology), who has done ample research in the eld of dental age esmaon and who is internaonally recognized as an expert in

this eld. This pracce also respects the recommendaons of the AGFAD (Study Group of Forensic Age Esmaon of the German Associaon for Forensic Medicine).

This study group, composed of forensic doctors, densts, radiologists and anthropologists, has published a guideline on this subject and recommends the use of the

following methods:

• a physical examination during which anthropometric data (height and weight, body type), signs of sexual maturation and possible developmental disorders are

checked;

•

a le

ft hand radiograph;

• a dental examination during which the dental status is checked and an orthopantomogram is assessed;

•

if t

he radiograph shows that the hand bones are fully developed, a radiography or a computed tomography (CT scan) of the clavicle is recommended to determine

whether the individual has reached the age of 21.

These methods should be combined to increase the accuracy of the diagnosis and to idenfy any possible developmental disorders. Furthermore, this guideline

prescribes the condions that benchmarking studies have to full in order to be used for age esmaon.

All hospitals the service Guardianship appeals to, follow the guidelines of this study group when making age esmaons.

(

) EMN, BELGIAN CONTACT POINT, Unaccompanied minors in Belgium, Reception, Return and Integration Arrangements, p. 26.

(

) ECRE/BCHV-CBAR, AIDA National Country Report Belgium, 2013, pp. 43.

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 101

A common remark is that medical examinaons do not allow an exact age determinaon. Indeed, all experts such as Prof. Dr. G. Willems recognise that skeletal and

dental age examinaons are always educated guesses that do not allow an exact age determinaon. They stress that the result is an age esmaon and that a margin

of error of approximately 1 to 2 years should always be taken into account. This method enables the service Guardianship to determine in a reliable way whether or

not a guardian has to be appointed, especially when the youngster cannot produce any authenc documents or simply does not know his or her date of birth (In the

developing countries, only half of the born children under the age of 5 are registered according to Unicef. In Sub-Saharan Africa, 64 % of the births are not registered

and in South Asia even 65 % of the births are not registered).

If the person is considered to be older than 18 years old, it is the Immigraon Oce that determines their age. The ‘Gauss curve’ is hereby used, whereby the mean

age is retained, given the smaller probability that the person will be at the margins of the curve (e.g. the doctor stated in his report that the applicant has an age of

20.6 years with a margin of error of 2 years, 20.6 is then the most probable age. The chance of him/her being younger than 18.6 or older than 22.6 is very low). If the

age as claimed by the UAM is possible according to the report of the doctor, the date of birth as claimed by the applicant is accepted. If the asylum applicant claims

to be 15 years old, but the age test demonstrates that the age is between 16.6 and 18.6, the person is considered to be 16.6 years old. In that case the Guardianship

service will take 16.6 to determine the age of birth and the date on which the guardianship will come to an end.

Once the guardianship Service has decided on the age assessment, the CGRS and the Immigraon Oce must respect this and adjust the registered age in the asylum

le and in all other les. Hereby, an ‘alias’ is used in which the claimed age upon registraon is menoned.

The guardian and/or the minor can provide addional proof about the minor’s age (e.g. ocial birth cercate, obtained through the embassy of the country of origin

in Belgium or its neighbouring countries), and the guardian can express his/her views about the minor’s age. If the minor and/or his/her guardian disagree with the

decision of the Guardianship Service, they can le, with the help of a lawyer, an appeal with the Council of State.

BG Yes. In the Law on Asylum and Refugees, there is an arcle envisaging the carrying out of age assessment.

CH -

CY Yes, Age Assessment process of Unaccompanied Minors in the framework of the Asylum Procedure

CZ -

DE The Federal Länder are responsible for the age determinaon of Unaccompanied Minors which takes place at the me of their being ‘taken into care’ (Inobhutnahme)

as soon as they get into contact with a German authority. Their respecve decision is also basis for the asylum procedure.

In the preamble of the law changing the Social Code in 2015, reference is made to the recommendaons of the Working Group of the Federal Youth Welfare Services

(Bundesarbeitsgemeinscha der Landesjugendämter) hp://www.bagljae.de/downloads/118_handlungsempfehlungen-umf_2014.pdf

Thus secon 42f Social Code provides the basis for the age determinaon process which introduces a gradual procedure:

1. Ch

eck of personal documents, search for additional information

Interview (two qualified, experienced staff members), overall impression of development incl. qualified visual inspection

3. In case of doubts: medical examination; method with lowest impact on the child’s health.

The Working Group of the Federal Youth Welfare Services advices to consult for the age determinaon process the recommendaons of the Group on Forensic Age

Diagnosc (Arbeitsgemeinscha für Forensische Altersdiagnosk, AGFAD; hp://campus.uni-muenster.de/leadmin/einrichtung/agfad/empfehlungen/empfehlungen_

ausserhalb_strafverfahren.pdf Internet research: 05/07/2016))

DK -

102 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

EE -

EL Protocol on UAM

ES -

FI The Finnish Alien Act says that, the performance of an examinaon requires that the person to be tested has given an informed consent in wring of his or her

own volion. The wrien consent of his or her parent or guardian or other legal representave is also required. Before obtaining consent, the applicant or sponsor

and the applicant’s or sponsor’s parent, guardian or other legal representave shall be given informaon on the importance of age assessment, the examinaon

methods used, potenal health eects, and the consequences of having and of refusing an examinaon. In a language which he or she may reasonably be expected to

understand. A medical age assessment to establish the age is carried out by the University of Helsinki, Department of Forensic Medicine at the request of the police,

Border Guard or Finnish Immigraon Service.

Two experts shall draw up a joint assessment. At least one of the experts shall be an employee of the University of Helsinki, Department of Forensic Medicine. An

expert may be an approved medical praconer or an approved denst with the necessary competence.

FR To enforce the L. 221-2-2 arcle of the Code for social acon and families, the decree of 24 June 2016 explains the condions of recepon and age assessment of

persons declaring being minors, and who are temporarily or denively deprived of the protecon of their family.

HR -

HU -

IE No. As a general rule, where the Child & Family Agency (TUSLA) has formed the professional opinion that a person referred to them is a minor or is an adult, ORAC

accepts the opinion of TUSLA. The outcome of the TUSLA assessment must be noed to ORAC in wring in the form of a detailed report. This report must be

included on the applicant’s le. A copy of the report is put on the referral le. ORAC acknowledges the report stang that ORAC accepts the professional opinion of

the HSE.

IT No, but we have some regional guidance. See i.e. varie\minori\protocollo_idencazione_msna.pdf

LT There is no formal policy or guidance at naonal level regarding age assessment.

LU -

LV The Asylum Law (Secon 27) prescribes that unaccompanied minors shall be subjected to medical examinaon, in order to determine person’s age.

Annex 3 Legal and policy framework EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 103

MT -

NL The guidelines are for age assessment in the asylum procedure are further specied in the Aliens Act Implementaon Guidelines (‘Vreemdelingencirculaire’) Arcle

C1/2.2.

NO Policy guidance: PN 2012-011

The policy guideline provides guidelines for processing asylum cases led by unaccompanied minors. One of the main topics in the guideline is age assessment and age

determinaon.

PL Oce for Foreigners and Border Guard has general internal guidelines in what case the age assessment should be done and what informaon about the assessment

should the applicant be given.

PT -

RO N/A

SE Yes. The policy on age assessment within the Migraon Agency is currently being revised, but the guidance from September 2015 is sll in force (SR 35/2015). The

policy in SR 35/2015 was developed primarily on the basis of the Supreme Migraon Court ruling that was menoned in the answer to Queson 2, but also because

of cricism by the Swedish Parliamentary Ombudsmen in 2012 (decision no 4107-2011) and 2015 (decision no 6942-2013) in specic cases relang to age assessment

performed by the agency. The decisions can be found on the website hp://www.jo.se/en

SI On age assessment we don’t have any formal policy or guidance at naonal level. The procedure concerning age assessment is in accordance with the Internaonal

Protecon Act and only for assessing the age of an unaccompanied minor.

SK The medical age assessment is performed by means of X-rays of the hands and elbow joints by a Department of Radiology. It is then noted in the medical reports, if

the observaon of the bones in the X-ray image corresponds to a development and growth of a person older than 18 years.

The medical age assessments are carried out at the request of the police, decision-maker and the guardian.

UK The Home Oce has issued guidance to its own sta which is available at hps://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/aachment_data/le/257462/

assessing-age.pdf

This guidance is currently being revised.

The Associaon of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS) in the UK has endorsed the following guidance for social workers when carrying out age assessments

hp://adcs.org.uk/assets/documentaon/Age_Assessment_Guidance_2015_Final.pdf

hp://adcs.org.uk/assets/documentaon/informaon_sharing_proforma_april_2015.doc

A shortened form is available at hp://www.makeitlooknice.co.uk/adcs/age-assessment-guidance/index.html

In addion, the following guidelines have also been produced for social workers conducng age assessments. They are called the ‘Hillingdon and Croydon guidelines’

based on experience in local authories with high numbers of unaccompanied migrant children.

104 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 3 Legal and policy framework

Other naonal legal instruments

[Reference to be inserted]

Naonal jurisprudence

[Reference to be inserted]

Naonal guidance

[Reference to be inserted]

4. Relevant jurisprudence (

)

Case ECLI:EU:C:2013:367 C-648/11 — MA and Others —

the Best interests of the child

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/

ALL/?uri=CELEX:62011CJ0648

Tarakhel v Switzerland, Application No 29217/12, Council of

Europe: European Court of Human Rights, 4

ovember 2014

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng-

press?i=003-4923136-6025044#{%22item

id%22:[%22003-4923136-6025044%22]}

Abdullahi Elmi and Aweys Abubakar v Malta, Applications

Nos. 25794/13 and 28151/13 Council of Europe: European

Court of Human Rights, in force since 22

ovember 2016

http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/

eng#{“itemid”:[“001-168780”]}

Recently in the UK the High Court and the Court of Appeal

have found the UK policy of judging the age of a UASC based

on appearance/demeanour to be unlawful particularly where it

may lead to detention.

http://www.asylumlawdatabase.eu/

en/case-law/uk-queen-application-aa-

v-secretary-state-home-department-

interested-party-wolverhampton#content

http://www.asylumlawdatabase.eu/en/

case-law/uk-r-application-aa-sudan-v-

secretary-state-home-department-9-

march-2017#content

https://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/

latest/news/4866_court_confirms_

government_s_age_policy_is_unlawful

5. So Law instruments

UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), General comment No. 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have

his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration (Article 3, para. 1), 29 May 2013, CRC/C/GC/14.

UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), General comment No. 6 (2005): Treatment of

Unaccompanied and Separated Children Outside their Country of Origin, 1 September 2005, CRC/GC/2005/6.

UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), General comment No. 12 (2009) The right of the child to be

heard 1 July 2009 CRC/C/GC/12.

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL The

protection of children in migration {SWD(2017) 129 final}, where an explicit reference is made to EASO to

update its age assessment guidance, available at: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/

files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/20170412_communication_on_the_protection_of_

children_in_migration_en.pdf

Council of Europe’s Action Plan on protecting refugee and migrant children (2017-2019) an Action Plan

on how to protect children on migration available at https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.

aspx?ObjectId=090000168071484e

(

) Given the dynamic and fast evolving nature of case-law and jurisprudence in this area, links to the following databases might be helpful to be informed

about the latest judicial positions on the topic: European database for asylum law (EDAL) http://www.asylumlawdatabase.eu/en, Refworld http://www.

refworld.org/cases.html and the British and Irish legal information institute http://www.bailii.org

Annex 4 Overview of the methods and procedural safeguards EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 105

Annex 4 Overview of the methods and

procedural safeguards in use in the age

assessment processes

(67)

(

) The tables included in this annex are a concise extract of the findings from the questionnaire circulated by EASO between 2016 and 2017, aimed at

mapping the particularities and similarities of the practice.

106 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 4 Overview of the methods and procedural safeguards

Overview of the procedural safeguards in use during age assessment processes (I)

EU+ state

NON-MEDICAL METHODS MEDICAL METHODS

Documents

submied

Esmaons based on

physical appearance

Age assessment

interview

Social service

assessment

Psychological

interviews

Dental

observaon

Physical

development

Sexual maturity

observaon

Carpal (hand/

wrist) X-ray

Collar bone

X-ray

Dental X-ray Other

Austria √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Belgium √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Bulgaria √ √ √ √ √

Croaa √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Cyprus √ √ √ √ √ √

Czech Republic √ √

nmark √

√ √ √ √

Estonia √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Finland √ √ √ √

France √ √ √ √ √ √

Ger

many √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ **

Greec

e √ √ √ √ √ √ √

√

Hungary √ √ √ √ √ √ √ ***

Ireland √ √ √ √

Ita

ly √ √ √ √ √ * √ √ √ √

√

Latvia √ √ √ √ √

Lithuania √ √ √ √

xembourg

√ √ ***

Malta √

√ √

Netherlands √ √ √

Norway √ √ √ √ √ √

land √ √

√ √ √ √

Portugal √ √ √ √ √ ****

Romania √ √ √ √ √ √

ovakia √ √

(

) √ (

) √ √ √ √

ovenia √ √

ain √ √

√ √

Sweden √ √ √ √ *****

Switzerland √ √ √

√ √ √ √

ited Kingdom √ √ √ √

27 19 17 11 6 16 11 7 23 12 19 4

(

) For victims of trafficking in human beings or vulnerable persons

(

) Visual assessment

(

***

) Pelvic bone X-ray

(

****

) Fourth rib (PT)

(

*****

) MRI of the knee (SE)

6869

(

) The initial estimation of age is only a guide, if it is determined by this estimation that a person is a minor. If he/she claims to be a minor and is suspected to be an adult, a medical examination is always undertaken. So the principle of benefit of the

doubt is used in this initial estimation.

(

) In SK there are only some consultations with social workers.

Annex 4 Overview of the methods and procedural safeguards EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 107

Overview of the procedural safeguards in use during age assessment (AA) processes (II)

EU+ state The best interests

of the child

ensured during

the AA process

Other approaches

aempted before

resorng to AA

An independent

person supports the

applicant during the

process

Applicant’s views are heard

and taken into consideraon

in accordance with his/her

maturity

Applicant is informed

about reasons, method,

consequences and results

for all types of assessments

Applicant is

informed for medical

assessments only

Applicant’s informed

consent required regardless

of the AA method applied

Applicant’s representave’s

consent required in all cases

Austria Yes Yes Yes Through legal representave No Yes No No

Belgium Yes* Yes Only in complex

cases**

Yes Yes No Only for medical AA method No

Bulgaria Yes** Yes Yes** Through legal representave No Yes Yes Yes

Croaa Not specied Yes Yes** Yes** Yes No Only for medical AA method Only for medical AA method

Cyprus Yes** Yes Yes** Yes Yes No Only for medical AA method Only for medical AA method

Czech Republic * Not specied Yes Not specied Not specied Not specied Only for medical AA method Not specied

Denmark Yes** Yes Yes Yes No Yes Only for medical AA method Not specied

Estonia * Not specied Yes Not specied Not specied Not specied Only for medical AA method Only for medical AA method

Finland Not specied Yes Yes** Not specied Yes, informaon page No Yes Yes

France Not specied Yes No Yes Yes No Only for medical AA method Not specied

Germany Not specied Yes Yes** Yes Yes No Yes Not specied

Greece * Yes Yes Not specied Yes No Yes Not specied

Hungary Not specied Yes Yes** Not specied Yes No Yes Only in case of applicants

below 14 years old

Ireland ** Yes Yes** Yes Yes No, only non-medical

methods are used

No, only non-medical

methods are used

No, only non-medical methods

are used

Italy * Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes

Latvia * Not specied Yes No No Yes No No

Lithuania Yes** Yes Yes** Yes** No Yes Yes Yes

Luxembourg Not specied Not specied Yes Not specied Not specied Not specied Not specied Not specied

Malta * Not specied Not specied Not specied Not specied Not specied Yes Not specied

Netherlands Yes** Yes IND sta Yes Yes, leaet on IP covers AA No Only for medical AA method Only for medical AA method

Norway * Yes Yes** Yes No Yes Only for medical AA method Only for medical AA method

Poland Not specied Yes Yes** Yes No Yes Only for medical AA method Only for medical AA method

Portugal Not specied Not specied Yes Not specied Not specied Not specied Yes Not specied

Romania Yes Yes During forensic

examinaon

Yes No Yes Only for medical AA method Only for medical AA method

Slovakia Yes ** During the

assessment

Yes**

(

) Yes Yes Yes No Yes (guardian’s or

representave’s wrien

consent)

Slovenia Yes** Yes Yes** Yes** Yes No Yes Yes

Spain Yes* Not specied Not specied Not specied Not specied Not specied Yes Not specied

Sweden Yes During the

assessment

Yes Yes Yes No Only for medical AA method Not specied

Switzerland Yes Yes Only for Dublin

cases

Only in case of negave

evaluaon on the minority

No No Not specied Not specied

United Kingdom Yes Yes Yes** Yes Yes No No, since only non-medical

methods are used

(

) Pending result applicant is treated as a child

(

) Guardian or representative or child welfare services ensure the best interests

Not specified: no answer has been provided or the information would require further clarification

(

) SK: The best interests are represented by a guardian and any further admission by an independent person to the proceedings must be agreed by the guardian (or legal representative).

108 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 4 Overview of the methods and procedural safeguards

Summary of key ndings

1� The best interests of the child are ensured during the age assessment process

▪

The guarantees are ensured in the legal framework: AT, CH, RO, SE, UK�

▪

The guarantees are ensured by treating the person as a child during the process: BE CZ, EE,

EL, IT, LV, MT, NO, ES

�

▪

The guarantees are ensured by guaranteeing the representative’s or guardian’s presence: BG,

CY, DK, IE, LT, NL, SK, SI

�

2� Other approaches for obtaining information on the applicant’s age are implemented before resorting

to age assessment procedures

▪

21 EU+ states usually attempt to obtain information before deciding to conduct an age

assessment:

AT, BE, BG, HR, CH, CY, DK, FI, FR, DE, EL, HU, IE, IT, LT, NL, NO, PL, RO, SI, UK.

▪

2 EU+ states attempt to obtain information during age assessment: SK, SE.

�

e applicant is supported by an independent person during the process

▪

22 EU+ states allow an independent person during age assessment: AT, BG, HR, CY, CZ, DK,

EE, FI, DE, EL, IE, IT, LV, LT, LU, NO, PL, PT, SK, SI, SE, UK.

ong them, 13 EU+ states (BG, HR, CY, FI, DE, HU, IE, LT NO PL, SK, SI, UK) confirmed that

this person will be the guardian or representative.

▪

In BE the guardian will be present only in complex cases.

▪

In NL the child will be supported by staff from the migration/asylum authorities, who is not

independent.

▪

In CH an independent person is present only for Dublin cases.

▪

In RO an independent person is present only during forensic examination.

▪

And independent person is present only if agreed by the guardian (or legal representative)

in SK

�

▪

In FR the applicant is supported by the asylum department.

4� The views of the applicant are heard and taken into consideration in accordance with his/her maturity

▪

14 EU+ states gather and take the applicant’s views into consideration: BE, CY, DK, FR, DE, IE,

IT, NL, NO, PL, RO, SK, SE, UK.

▪

5 EU+ states obtain them through the representative or the guardian: AT, BG, HR, LT, SI.

▪

CH only takes them into consideration in the case of negative results (adult).

�

e applicant is informed of the reasons for an age assessment, the method considered, the

consequences and the possible results for the asylum procedure and the consequences of a refusal

to undergo such an assessment

▪

The applicant is informed about the reasons for the assessment, the method applied,

the consequences of the results of such an assessment for the asylum procedure and the

consequences of a refusal to undergo it regarding all the methods in 15 EU+ states: BE HR,

CY, FI, FR, DE, EL, HU, IE, IT, NL, SK, SI, SE, UK�

Annex 4 Overview of the methods and procedural safeguards EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 109

▪

9 EU+ states inform the applicant only regarding the medical methods: AT, BG, DK, LV, LT,

NO, PL, RO

�

▪

In CH this happens only in the case of a negative evaluation of the minority.

6� The applicant’s and/or representative’s informed consent is required for the age assessment regardless

of the age assessment method applied

▪

11 EU+ states require the applicant’s consent for all the methods: BG, FI, DE, EL, HU, IT, LT,

MT, PT, SI, ES

�

▪

12 EU+ states require the applicant’s consent only for medical methods: BE, HR, CY, CZ, DK,

EE, FR, NL, NO, PL, RO, SE

�

▪

4 do not require consent: AT, LV, IE, UK (IE and UK do not require it since they do not use

medical methods).

▪

SK does not require the applicant’s consent but does require the representative’s or guardian’s

consent.

▪

6 EU+ states require consent from the representative in all the cases: BG, FI, IT, LT, SI, SK�

▪

7 EU+ states require consent from the representative only for medical examinations: HR, CY,

EE, NL, NO, PL, RO

�

▪

HU requires consent from the representative if the applicant’s age appears to be below 14

years

�

▪

5 EU+ states (AT, BE, IE, LV, UK) do not require consent from the representative in any case.

IE and UK do not require it since they do not use medical methods.

� Be

nefit of the doubt is applied in the age assessment process

▪

17 EU+ states apply the benefit of doubt: BE, BG, CY, CZ, EE, FR, DE, EL, IE, IT (with a margin

of 2 years) LV, LU, MT, SK, SE, CH, UK.

▪

In FI and RO the principle is not applied.

8� The applicant has the possibility to refuse the age assessment, regardless of the method used

▪

15 EU+ states recognise the applicant’s right to refuse the age assessment regardless of the

method: AT, BE, HR, CY, CZ, EE, FI, DE, EL, HU, IT, MT, NL, RO, SI

�

▪

7 EU+ states recognise the possibility to refuse only medical examinations: BG, DK, FR, LT,

NO, PL, SE

�

▪

In UK refusal implies an agreement with the presumed age.

▪

LU does not recognise the possibility to refuse to undergo the process.

9� Refusal to undertake age assessment does not result in automatic assessment as adult

▪

12 EU+ states would not automatically consider the applicant as an adult in case of refusal:

AT, BE, BG, DK , EE, FR, DE, EL, IT, MT, NO, CH�

▪

6 EU+ states would consider the applicant as adult if there is no justification for the refusal

or no any additional evidence of the minority: HR, FI, LT, RO, SI, SE

�

▪

In UK refusal would imply the applicant agrees with the presumed age.

▪

6 EU+ states would automatically consider the applicant as an adult if he/she refuses to

undergo an age assessment: CZ, HU, LU NL, PL, SK�

110 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 4 Overview of the methods and procedural safeguards

10� Refusal to undertake age assessment is not taken into account when deciding on the application for

international protection

▪

7 EU+ states would not take the refusal into account when deciding on the international

protection claim: BE, BG, CY (clarifying that unless the minority is relevant to the claim), FI,

DE, IT, SK, UK�

▪

14 EU+ states would take the refusal into account when examining the claim: AT, HR, EE, HU,

LV, LT, LU, NL, NO, PL, RO, SI, SE, CH�

11� The applicant is informed of results in a language he/she understands or is expected to understand

▪

23 EU+ states ensure the applicant is informed in a language that they understand or supposed

to understand: AT, BE, BG, HR, CY, CZ, EE, FI, FR, DE, EL, HU, IT, LT, MT, NL, NO, RO, SK, SI,

SE, CH, UK�

▪

DK only informs about the results when an applicant is assessed to be older than the claimed

age.

12� Inconclusive results of the age assessment procedure are considered in the applicant’s favour

▪

16 EU+ states apply the benefit of the doubt in the case of inconclusive results: AT, BE,

HR, DK, FR, DE, EL , HU, IT, LT, MT, PL, RO, SK, SI, CH�

▪

6 EU+ states do not apply the benefit of the doubt: BG, FI, NL, NO, SE, UK�

13� Sufficient legal remedies are available to the applicant against a decision on age assessment

▪

8 EU+ states offer the possibility to challenge the age assessment decision separately: BE, DK,

FR, IE, IT, MT, SE, UK. More information is needed in: BG, CZ, EE, EL, ES, LV, LU, PL, PT, RO, SI�

▪

9 EU+ states offer the possibility to challenge the age assessment decision as part of the

international protection decision or simultaneously: AT, HR, FI, DE, HU, LT, NL, NO, CH�

▪

2 EU+ states do not offer legal remedies to the applicant against age assessment: CY, SK�

Annex 5 Bibliography EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion 111

Annex 5 Bibliography

Brisith Association of Social Workers, BASW position statement, 2015.

ADCS, Age assessment joint working guidance, 2015.

al, Eid RMR et. n.d., Assessment of dental maturity of Brazilian children aged 6 to 14 years using Demirijan’s

method�

-Krenawi, A. and Graham, J. R., ‘The cultural mediator: bridging the gap between a non-Western

community and professional social work practice’, British Journal of Social Work, 2001

�

Busler, D., ‘Psychosocial age assessments in the UK’, Forced Migration Review, 2016.

FRA, Guardianship for children deprived of parental care, 2014, http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2014/

guardianship-children-deprived-parental-care-handbook-reinforce-guardianship

Dedouit, F., Auriol, J., Rousseau, H., Rougé, D., Crubézy, E. and Telmon, N., ‘Age assessment by magnetic

resonance imaging of the knee: a preliminary study’, Forensic Science International, 2012, pp.

17-232.

Demirjian, A., Goldstein, H. and Tanner, J. M., ‘A new system of dental age assessment’, Human biology,

1973, p. 211, http://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/cmm/migrated/documents/dental-age-

assessment.pdf

Dvorak, J., George, J., Junge, A. and Hodler, J., ‘Age determination by magnetic resonance imaging of the

wrist in adolescent male football players’, British Journal of Sports Medicine, 2007, pp.

5-52.

Dyball, K., Mcphie, G. and Tudor, C., Age assessment practice guidance: an age assessment pathway for

social workers in Scotland, 2012.

European Council on Refugees and Exiles, Right to justice: quality legal assisstance for unaccompanied

children — Comparative report, ECRE, 2014.

Food and Agricuture Organisation of the United Nations, Guidelines for estimating the month and the year

of birth of young children, 2008.

Frontex, VEGA handbook: children at airports, 2015, http://frontex.europa.eu/assets/Publications/Training/

VEGA_Children_Handbook.pdf

Gertych, A., Zhang, A., Sayre, J., Pospiech-Kurkowska, S. and Huang, H. K., ‘Bone age assessment of children

using a digital hand atlas — Computerised medical imaging and graphics’, The Official Journal of the

Computerized Medical Imaging Society, 2007, pp. 322-331.

Gleiser, I. and Hunt, E. E., ‘The permanent mandibular first molar: its calcification, eruption and decay’,

Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 1955, Vol. 13, pp. 2

53-283, doi:10.1002/ajpa.1330130206.

Greulich, W. W. and Pyle, S. I., Radiographic atlas of skeletal development of the hand and wrist, second

edition, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1959.

Inter-Agency Working Group on Unaccompanied and Separated Children, Inter-agency guiding principles

on unaccompanied and separated children, 2004, http://www.refworld.org/docid/4113abc14.html

Kt, Professor Sir Al Aynsley-Green, The assessment of age in undocumented migrants, Aynsley-Green

consulting, 2011.

Ladwig, K-H., Brockhaus, A. C., Baumert, J., et al., Post-traumatic stress disorder and not depression is

associated with shorter leukocyte telomere length: findings from 3 000 participants in the population-

based, KORA F4 Study, Ouellette MM, ed. PLoS ONE, 2013.

Olze, A., Schmeling, A., Taniguchi, M., Maeda, H., van Niekerk, P., Wernecke, K-D. and Geserick, G., ‘Forensic

age estimation in living subjects: the ethnic factor in wisdom tooth mineralisation’, International Journal

of Legal Medicine, 2004, pp. 1

70-173.

Ritz-Timme, S., Cattaneo, C., Collins, M. J., et al., ‘Age estimation: the state of the art in relation to the

specific demands of forensic practise’, International Journal of Legal Medicine, 2000, pp. 2

9-136.

Cameriere, R., De Luca, S., Cingolani, M. and Ferrante, L., Are the common age estimation procedures useful

for assessing age of unaccompanied children and adolescents?, 2017.

Schutt, R. K., Investigating the social world: the process and practice of research, University of Massachusetts

Boston, eighth edition, 2015.

112 EASO praccal guide on age assessment: Second edion Annex 5 Bibliography

Serin, J., Rérolle, C., Pucheux, J., Dedouit, F., Telmon, N., Savall, F. and Saint-Martin, P., ‘Contribution of

magnetic resonance imaging of the wrist’, International Journal of Legal Medicine, 2016

�

hmeling, A. et al., ‘Age estimation of unaccompanied minors’, Forensic Science International, Part

General considerations, 2006.

Schmeling, A. et al., ‘Studies on the time-frame for ossification of the medical clavicular epiphyseal cartilage

in conventional radiography’, International Journal of Legal Medicine, 2004, Vol.

8, No

pp.

Schmeling, A., Dettmeyer, R., Rudolf, E., Vieth, V. and Geserick, G., ‘Forensic age estimation: methods,

certainty, and the law’, Dtsch Arztebl Int, 2016, pp. 44-50.

Schmeling, A., Garamendi, P. M., Prieto, J. L. and Landa, M. I., ‘Forensic age estimation in unaccompanied

minors and young living adults’, Forensic medicine — From old problems to new challenges, 2011, edited

by Prof. Duarte Nuno Vieira, InTech, ISBN: 978-953-307-262-3, http://www.intechopen.com/books/

forensic-medicine-from-old-problems-to-new-challenges/forensic-ageestimation-in-unaccompanied-

minors-and-young-living-adults

Schmeling, A., Grundmann, C., Fuhrmann, A., Kaatsch, H-J., Knell, B., Ramsthaler, F., Reisinger, W., Riepert,

T., Ritz-Timme, S., Rösing, F. W., Rötzscher, K. and Geserick, G., ‘Criteria for age estimation in living

individuals’, International Journal of Legal Medicine, 2008, pp. 457-460.

Schmidt, S. et al., ‘Sonographic evaluation of apophyseal ossification of the iliac crest in forensic age

diagnostics in living individuals’, International Journal of Legal Medicine, 2011

�

Separated children in Europe programme, ‘Review of current laws, policies and practices relating to age’,

from a thematic working group, 2011.

Separated children in Europe programme, Statement of good practice, SCEP, 2009.

Settersten, R. A., Mayer, J. and Ulrich, K., ‘The measurement of age, age structuring, and the life course’,

Annual Review of Sociology, Annual Reviews Stable, Vol.

, 1997, pp.

3-261, http://www.jstor.org/

stable/2952551

Smith, T. and Brownlees, L., ‘Age assessment practices: a literature review and annotated bibliography’, Child

protection section UNICEF, 2011, http://www.unicef.org/protection/Age_Assessment_Practices_2010.pdf

�

lari, A. C. and Abramovitch, K., ‘The accuracy and precision of third molar development as an indicator

of chronological age in Hispanics’, Journal of Forensic Science, Vol. 47, No 3, 2002, pp. 531-535.

Tanner, J. M., Oshman, D., Lindgren, G., Grunbaum, J. A., Elsouki, R. and Labarthe, D., ‘Reliability and validity

of computer-assisted estimates of Tanner-Whitehouse skeletal maturity (CASAS): comparison with the

manual method’, Journal Hormone Research in Paediatrics, 1994, pp.

88-294.

Thevissen, P. W., Kvaal, S. I., Dierickx, K. and Willems, G., ‘Ethics in age estimation of unaccompanied minors’,

Journal of Forensic Odontostomatology, 2012, pp.

-102.

Tscholl, P. M., Junge, A., Dvorak, J. and Zubler, V., ‘MRI of the wrist is not recommended for age determination

in female football players of U-16/U-17 competitions’, Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science

Sports, 2016, pp.

24-328.

UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Child protection issue brief: birth registration, UNHCR, 2013.

UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Field handbook for the implementation of UNHCR BID

guidelines, 2011, http://www.refworld.org/docid/4e4a57d02.html

UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Guidelines on international protection No

child asylum

claims under Articles

(A)2 and 1(F) of the 1951 Convention and/or 1967 Protocol relating to the Status

of Refugees, 2009.

UNHCR and UNICEF, Safe and sound: what states can do to ensure respect for the best interests of

unaccompanied and separated children in Europe, UNHCR/UNICEF, 2014.

UNHCR, The heart of the matter: assessing credibility when children apply for asylum in the European Union,

UNHCR, 2014, http://www.refworld.org/docid/55014f434.html [accessed 2

uly 2017].

UNHCR, Guidelines on determining the best interests of the child, 2008, http://www.unhcr.org/4566b16b2.pdf

UNHCR, Note on burden and standard of proof in refugee claims, 1998.

UNHCR, Safe and sound, p.

2, http://www.refworld.org/docid/5423da264.html

HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS

Free publications:

• one copy:

via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);

• more than one copy or posters/maps:

from the European Union’s representations (http://ec.europa.eu/represent_en.htm);

from the delegations in non-EU countries (http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/index_en.htm);

by contacting the Europe Direct service (http://europa.eu/europedirect/index_en.htm) or

calling 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (freephone number from anywhere in the EU) (*).

(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you).

Priced publications:

• via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu).