France - CNDA, 23 December 2009, Ms. K., n° 636547/08017005
| Country of Decision: | France |
| Country of applicant: | North Korea South Korea , |
| Court name: | National Asylum Court (CNDA) |
| Date of decision: | 23-12-2009 |
| Citation: | CNDA, 23 décembre 2009, n° 636547/08017005, Mme K. |
| Additional citation: | Cour nationale du droit d’asile, 23 décembre 2009, Mme K., n° 636547/08017005 |
Keywords:
| Keywords |
|
Country of origin
Description
The country (or countries) which are a source of migratory flows and of which a migrant may have citizenship. In refugee context, this means the country (or countries) of nationality or, for stateless persons, of former habitual residence. |
Headnote:
The protection provided by the 1951 Refugee Convention can only be afforded if it is established that the asylum applicant, for a valid reason linked to one of the grounds listed in Art 1A(2) of this Convention, is unable or unwilling to avail him/herself of the protection of the country(ies) of nationality or, for a stateless person, of the country of habitual residence.
Facts:
The applicant was born in North Korea and feared for her security if returned to her country of origin because she left the country illegally. The French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (Ofpra) rejected her asylum application. She challenged this negative decision before the Cour Nationale du Droit d’Asile (National Asylum Court) (CNDA).
Decision & reasoning:
The Court considered that the protection provided by the 1951 Refugee Convention has a subsidiary character as it could only be afforded if it is established that the asylum applicant, for a valid reason linked to on one of the grounds listed in Art 1A(2) of this Convention, is unable or unwilling to avail him/herself of the protection of the country(ies) of nationality or, for a stateless person, of the country of habitual residence.
The Court declared that the 1948 Constitution of the Republic of South Korea and the law on nationality as amended for the last time in January 2004 entitled the applicant to benefit from South Korea nationality since she was born on the Korean peninsula. The applicant could therefore automatically avail herself of the citizenship of the Republic of Korea. Furthermore, the applicant did not justify, by any ground linked to the 1951 Refugee Convention, her refusal to apply to the consular authorities of South Korea for the purpose of the examination of her entitlement to South Korean nationality.
Outcome:
The claim was rejected.