France - CNDA, 30 October 2009, M.P., n°640035/08020515
| Country of Decision: | France |
| Country of applicant: | Bhutan |
| Court name: | National Asylum Court / Cour nationale du droit d’asile (CNDA) |
| Date of decision: | 30-10-2009 |
| Citation: | CNDA, 30 octobre 2009, M.P., n° 640035/08020515 |
| Additional citation: | Cour nationale du droit d’asile, 30 octobre 2009, M.P., n° 640035/08020515 |
Keywords:
| Keywords |
|
Persecution Grounds/Reasons
Description
Per Article 1A ofthe1951 Refugee Convention, one element of the refugee definition is that the persecution feared is “for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion“. Member States must take a number of elements into account when assessing the reasons for persecution as per Article 10 of the Qualification Directive. |
|
Nationality
Description
One of the grounds of persecution specified in the refugee definition per Article 1A ofthe1951 Refugee Convention. Nationality can be defined generally as the legal bond between a person and a State which does not indicate the person's ethnic origin. According to the Qualification Directive, when considered as a reason for persecution, the concept of nationality is not confined to citizenship or lack thereof and, in particular, includes membership of a group determined by its cultural, ethnic, or linguistic identity, common geographical or political origins or its relationship with the population of another State |
Headnote:
The practices used by the authorities of a given country in order to exclude some citizens, members of a minority, from nationality can be considered as persecution since they are linked to one of the grounds listed in Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Refugee Convention.
Facts:
The applicant, who was born in Bhutan, belonged to the Nepali speaking minority. From 1990 on, the Bhutanese government imposed a single language, as well as traditional dress and the Buddhist religion. The Nepali speaking minority suffered from severe repression. Together with his family, the applicant was expelled to India, and Nepal. He then worked in New Delhi where he had a child with a Nepali citizen. He feared being arrested because of his irregular administrative situation. He left India to come to France where he lodged an asylum application. The French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (Ofpra) rejected his application. The applicant challenged this negative decision before the Cour Nationale du Droit d’Asile (National Asylum Court) (CNDA).
Decision & reasoning:
The Court considered that the applicant could not avail himself of the protection of the Bhutanese authorities which still refuse the return of Nepali speaking citizens who were forced into exile from 1990. The practices used by these authorities in order to exclude some citizens, members of a minority, from the Bhutanese nationality can be considered as persecution since they are linked to one of the grounds listed in Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Refugee Convention.
Outcome:
The applicant was granted refugee status.