The Czech Constitutional Court yesterday rejected a motion to repeal part of the law on the residence of foreigners, concerning the obligation to secure an interpreter at the applicant’s own expense, but ordered a more lenient interpretation of the law as it is applied.
The law states that if foreign nationals fail to bring an interpreter to the hearing, their residence application proceedings will be terminated, and they will not be able to fully defend themselves in court. The Regional Court in Brno considered the law to be unreasonably harsh, and therefore appealed to the Constitutional Court with a motion to strike down the controversial provision.
“The provision must be interpreted narrowly, such that proceedings may be halted only if the administrative authority is unable to decide on the merits of the application without the assistance of an interpreter,” said the ruling by judge-rapporteur Josef Baxa.
It must also be clear that the foreign national is failing to fulfill their obligation to arrange for an interpreter – for example, by attempting to obstruct the process.
“I am pleased with this,” judge Martin Kopa of the regional court told ČTK. “It is in line with the essence of my proposal. It could help in this case and other similar cases.”
The Regional Court highlighted the rigidity of the legal framework, and described its harsh impact on specific individuals as “like using a cannon to kill a fly”. It addressed the issue based on a lawsuit filed by a foreign national who wanted to extend the validity of his work permit. However, the authorities had doubts about the nature of the man’s job, so they summoned him for questioning.
The man came alone the first time, and so the proceedings did not go ahead. The second time, he was accompanied by the cooperative’s chair, who is Ukrainian, but has lived in the Czech Republic for more than 20 years and speaks Czech well. However, the authorities did not recognise the chair as an interpreter because he was not registered on the official list, and due to suspicions he might be biased. Consequently, the hearing did not take place on the second attempt either, and the proceedings were suspended.
The foreign national filed an appeal, complaining of bureaucratic formalities and undue strictness. However, the Commission for decisions on the residence of foreigners rejected the appeal, and a lawsuit was consequently filed with the regional court, which will now reconsider the case, taking into account the legal opinion of the constitutional judges.
“We have provided guidance for future practice, both to administrative authorities, namely the Ministry of the Interior and, where applicable, the Commission for decisions on the residence of foreigners, and to administrative courts,” Baxa said.
