Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
France
Country of Decision : France
Court Name : FR: Council of State [Conseil d'État]
Date of decision : 18/03/2019
Type : Judgment
ECLI : ECLI: FR: CECHR: 2019: 414740.20190318
Case Number/Citation/ Document Symbol : 414740

MC., Mme D. and MA.B. (Iraq) vs French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA) [Decision of 30/11/2016]

According to the national contribution to the EMN Report on Migration and Asylum 2019:

The Council of State rejected OFPRA’s appeal in a case concerning an Iraqi national, who was involved with the Peshmerga, that the Court had recognised as a refugee on the grounds of his fears of persecution from the Islamic State organisation on account of his political opinions. In its appeal, the Office reproached the Court for, in particular, failing to apply the exclusion clause, on the basis of paragraphs b) and c) due to his participation in combat and his posting photographs in which he posed alongside the body of a slain IS combatant on his personal social media account. However, the Council of State considered that the Court had reached its sovereign conclusion that he had posed for this photograph and circulated it upon the orders of his hierarchy, and that there had never been any demonstration of his taking part personally in atrocities. Indeed, the established facts, qualified as mere offences under French criminal law, failed to reach, according to the Council of State, the threshold of gravity required for application of the exclusion clauses.

Exclusion; Iraq; Second Instance determination; Serious (non-political) crime;

National law only (in case there is no reference to EU law/ECHR);

EASO Annual Report on the Situation of Asylum in the EU

France,FR: Council of State [Conseil d'État], MC., Mme D. and MA.B. (Iraq) vs French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA) [Decision of 30/11/2016], 18/03/2019, ECLI: FR: CECHR: 2019: 414740.20190318
FR: The Council of State rejected OFPRA's appeal and considered that the exclusion clause is not applicable to the case

https://caselaw.easo.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=992