France - CNDA, 24 April 2009, Mr. G., n°625816

Country of Decision:
Country of Applicant:
Date of Decision:
24-04-2009
Citation:
CNDA, 24 avril 2009, M.G., n° 625816
Additional Citation:
Cour nationale du droit d’asile, 24 avril 2009, M.G., n° 625816
Court Name:
National Asylum Court / Cour nationale du droit d’asile (CNDA)
National / Other Legislative Provisions:
France - Ceseda (Code of the Entry and Stay of Foreigners and Asylum Law) - Art L.711-1
France - Ceseda (Code of the Entry and Stay of Foreigners and Asylum Law) - Art L.712-1
France - Ceseda (Code of the Entry and Stay of Foreigners and Asylum Law) - Art L.713-2
Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version
Headnote: 

The situation which currently prevails in the Republic of Chechnya does not amount to generalised violence resulting from a situation of internal or international armed conflict.

Facts: 

The applicant, from the Russian Federation of Chechen origin, claimed that he was persecuted because his uncle belonged to the Aslan Maskhadov ‘s  presidential guard since 1996. He left his country of origin in 2007. The French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (Ofpra) rejected his asylum application. He lodged an appeal against this negative decision before the Cour Nationale du Droit d’Asile (National Asylum Court) (CNDA).

Decision & Reasoning: 

The Court examined firstly whether the applicant qualified for refugee status according to the 1951 Refugee Convention. It however considered that the alleged persecution was not established and that the fears were unfounded.

Furthermore, the Court examined the asylum application within the context which currently prevailed in the Russian Federation, in particular in the Republic of Chechnya. The Court highlighted the stabilisation and the improvement of the security situation in the Republic of Chechnya since the beginning of 2007, as well as the weakening of the rebel guerilla war which was at the time very fragmented, residual and restricted to a few mountainous areas. The Court considered that this situation did not amount to generalized violence resulting from a situation of internal or international armed conflict as under Article L.712-1 c) Ceseda [which transposes Article 15(c) of the Qualification Directive].

Finally the Court considered that this case did not fall within under Article L.712-1 a) and b) Ceseda [which transpose Article 15(a) and (b) of the Qualification Directive].

Outcome: 

The claim was rejected.

Observations/Comments: 

Article L.712-1 Ceseda [which transposes Article 15 of the QD] reads [unofficial translation]:

“Subject to the provisions of Article L. 712-2 [exclusion], subsidiary protection is granted to any person who does not qualify for refugee status under the criteria defined in Article L. 711-1 and who establishes that she/he faces one of the following serious threats in her/his country:
a) death penalty;
b) torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
c) serious, direct and individual threat to a civilian’s life or person by reason of generalised violence resulting from a situation of internal or international armed conflict”.

Under French legislation, the threat should thus not only be “serious and individual” (as in the Qualification Directive) but also “direct”. Also, French legislation refers to “generalized” violence rather than “indiscriminate” violence.