Germany - High Administrative Court Nordrhein-Westfalen, 17 August 2010, 8 A 4063/06.A

Facts:

The applicant applied for asylum in Germany in April 2002, stating that he had been a member of the Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Party (EPRP) since 1991. In 2001 he was imprisoned and severely tortured because of his activities for this party. In 2002 he managed to escape from prison. The German asylum authorities rejected his application in October 2002.

In the appeal procedure at the Administrative Court the applicant further stated that he had become a member of a local support committee for the EPRP in Germany. His appeal was rejected by the Administrative Court of Cologne in September 2006. The Administrative Court deemed his statements not credible as far as the events preceding his departure from Ethiopia were concerned. Neither did the political activities in exile justify eligibility for refugee status since the EPRP was not the focus of attention from the Ethiopian authorities and the applicant had not been active in a leading position for the organisation.

The High Administrative Court granted a further appeal (Berufung). The applicant argued that the Administrative Court had made an incorrect assessment of the risks to members of the EPRP and to persons who were politically active in exile, since the Administrative Court had failed to take into account recent country of origin information.

Decision & reasoning:

The applicant's further appeal had merit. Both the authorities and the Administrative Court had unlawfully denied the applicant's eligibility for refugee status. The court stated:

It can be left open whether the applicant has been subjected to persecution before he left Ethiopia or had been directly threatened with persecution. The facilitated standard of proof or Art. 4.4 of the Qualification Directive is not relevant in the present case since there is a considerable probability that the applicant is at risk of persecution because of his political activities which he took up while in exile in Germany. Art. 5 of the Qualification Directive determines that a risk of persecution may be based on activities which have taken place since the applicant left the country of origin, especially if those activities constitute the expression and continuation of convictions or orientations held in the country of origin. In contrast to the former legal situation in Germany, the new provision which transposes the Qualification Directive (Section 28 (1a) of the Asylum Procedure Act) does not require that the applicant must have “recognizably been acting on” the conviction in his country of origin.

The Ethiopian government is intensively monitoring activities of their citizens in exile. This can be substantiated with regards to a directive from the Ethiopian Foreign Ministry which was published in June 2006 by the opposition. Its existence has been confirmed by all authorities on the subject. This directive aims to register the names of all Ethiopian citizens living abroad and their membership of groups or organisations. This means that the monitoring and registration of Ethiopians living abroad is not limited to the supporters of certain organisations or to high-ranking politicians. Instead, the directive expressly refers to Ethiopians who do not belong to any organisation, to people sympathising with certain organisations, to neutral persons, to associations, regular meeting places etc.

This shows that the “tolerance level” of the Ethiopian state with regard to political activities of its citizens in exile is very low. It follows from this low tolerance level that a risk of persecution can be assumed if the applicant is seriously pursuing opposition activities and thus is more exposed than mere “hangers-on”. Furthermore, the Ethiopian diaspora in Germany is so small that it has to be assumed that even local associations are monitored by the Ethiopian secret service.

Outcome:

The decisions of the authorities and the Administrative Court were revoked. The authorities were oblighed to grant refugee status to the applicant.

Subsequent proceedings:

Unknown.