Belgium – Council of State, 26 May 2009, Nr. 193.523
Keywords:
| Keywords |
|
Credibility assessment
{ return; } );"
>
Description
Assessment made in adjudicating an application for a visa, or other immigration status, in order to determine whether the information presented by the applicant is consistent and credible. |
|
Individual assessment
{ return; } );"
>
Description
The carrying out of an assessment on an individual and personal basis. In relation to applications for international protection, per Article 4(3) of the Qualification Directive, this includes taking into account: (a) all relevant facts as they relate to the country of origin at the time of taking a decision; (b) the relevant statements and documentation presented by the applicant; “(c) the individual position and personal circumstances of the applicant, including factors such as background, gender and age, so as to assess whether, on the basis of the applicant's personal circumstances, the acts to which the applicant has been or could be exposed would amount to persecution or serious harm; (d) whether the applicant's activities since leaving the country of origin were engaged in for the sole or main purpose of creating the necessary conditions for applying for international protection, so as to assess whether these activities will expose the applicant to persecution or serious harm if returned to that country; (e) whether the applicant could reasonably be expected to avail himself of the protection of another country where he could assert citizenship.” |
|
Subsidiary Protection
{ return; } );"
>
Description
The protection given to a third-country national or a stateless person who does not qualify as a refugee but in respect of whom substantial grounds have been shown for believing that the person concerned, if returned to his or her country of origin, or in the case of a stateless person, to his or her country of former habitual residence, would face a real risk of suffering serious harm as defined in Article 15 of 2004/83/EC, and to whom Article 17(1) and (2) of 2004/83/EC do not apply, and is unable, or, owing to such risk, unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of that country.” “Note: The UK has opted into the Qualification Directive (2004/83/EC) but does not (legally) use the term Subsidiary Protection. It is believed that the inclusion of Humanitarian Protection within the UK Immigration rules fully transposes the Subsidiary Protection provisions of the Qualification Directive into UK law. |
Headnote:
Facts:
Decision & reasoning:
The Council of State disagreed with the applicant’s argument. The Council stated that “a reference to the general situation in the country of origin cannot suffice, but that the applicant must demonstrate a link between his/her person and the general situation, even if this does not require evidence of an individual threat.” The Council then considered that by making implausible statements, in particular regarding her alleged stay/residence in Chechnya, the applicant had herself made the evidence of such a link with her person impossible. The Council ruled that the CALL’s decision to refuse subsidiary protection status on credibility grounds was perfectly valid. It was not necessary to answer the “propiska” argument.