In order to assess the existence of the conditions set out in Section 8 (1) AsylG 2005, sufficiently up-to-date country reports must be used and this applies in particular to countries with rapidly changing security situation. In this context, reference should be made, for example, to the  UNHCR guidelines or to the EASO reports.

The Constitutional Court noted that the Federal Administrative Court (BVwG) made no reference in the contested to the EASO country reports (Country Guidance) and which are relevant for the examination of the reasonableness of an internal flight alternative. This matter is relevant in particular with regard to Afghan national born outside Afghanistan or long-lived abroad.

Consequently, the BVwG did not sufficiently reasoned and justified, in the light of these sources of national information, the reasons to consider that the applicant could be expected to set up in Hera or Mazar-e Sharif on the basis of individual circumstances. The BVwG's comprehensive references in the contested decision to the relevant highest court case-law, but without making use of the country reports abovementioned, was found insufficient to assess the applicant's real possibility to settle back to Afghanistan.