Belgium – Council for Alien Law Litigation, 29 February 2008, Nr. 8.259
Keywords:
| Keywords |
|
Assessment of facts and circumstances
Description
The duty of the state to carry out an individual assessment of all relevant elements of the asylum application according to the provisions of Article 4 of the Qualification Directive, including considering past persecution and credibility; and the duty of the applicant to submit as soon as possible all statements and documentation necessary to substantiate the application. |
|
Benefit of doubt
Description
The advantage derived from doubt about guilt, a possible error, or the weight of evidence. “When statements are not susceptible of proof, even with independent research, if the applicant's account appears credible, he should, unless there are good reasons to the contrary, be given the benefit of the doubt. The requirement of evidence should thus not be too strictly applied in view of the difficulty of proof inherent in the special situation in which an applicant for refugee status finds himself. Allowance for such possible lack of evidence does not, however, mean that unsupported statements must necessarily be accepted as true if they are inconsistent with the general account put forward by the applicant." |
|
Refugee sur place
Description
In the EU context, a person granted refugee status based on international protection needs which arose sur place, i.e. on account of events which took place since they left their country of origin. In a global context, a person who is not a refugee when they leave their country of origin, but who becomes a refugee, that is, acquires a well-founded fear of persecution, at a later date. Synonym: Objective grounds for seeking asylum occurring after the applicant's departure from his/her country of origin Note: Refugees sur place may owe their fear of persecution to a coup d'état in their home country, or to the introduction or intensification of repressive or persecutory policies after their departure. A claim in this category may also be based on bona fide political activities, undertaken in the country of residence or refuge. |
Headnote:
The CALL ruled that while the reasons for persecution given in an asylum application can be, by themselves insufficiently serious, they could, when taken cumulatively and in connection with the situation in the country of origin, justify being given the benefit of the doubt.
Facts:
In 2007 the applicant lodged a second asylum application. This time the application was based on the fact that, for the previous 7 years, he had sympathised with the Kurdish Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI) in Belgium and that he had in the meantime become a formal member of that party (he received his membership card during the asylum process). During these 7 years in Belgium he had regularly engaged in activities for this party. As a result of this, the applicant claimed that the authorities harassed his family in Iran and that his life would be in danger were he to return. The CGRS, however, rejected the application and refused to grant him refugee or subsidiary protection status, partly on the basis that he was lacking credibility and partly because of the applicant’s minimal involvement with the opposition party. The applicant lodged an appeal against this decision.
Decision & reasoning:
Outcome:
Refugee status was granted.