The case concerns a Guinean national, Mr Aboubacar Diakité, who applied for asylum in Belgium in 2008, arguing that he had been the victim of acts of violence in Guinea, following his participation in protest movements against the ruling regime.Īccording to Article 2(e) of the Qualification Directive, a person is eligible for subsidiary protection if there exist ‘substantial grounds for believing that’, if returned to their country of origin, an applicant faces a ‘real risk of suffering serious harm’. The CJEU was asked to clarify whether the reference to ‘internal armed conflict’ in the context of EU asylum law, must be read independently from the definition used in international humanitarian law (“IHL”) and, if so, which criteria must be met for a situation to amount to an ‘internal armed conflict’. On 30 January 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued a preliminary reference ruling in case C-285/12 Diakité concerning the interpretation of ‘internal armed conflict’ in the context of the subsidiary protection regime, established by Directive 2004/83/EC (“ Qualification Directive“).
This article is to be read in conjunction with the EDAL Case Summary
0 kommentar(er)
