In a decision delivered on Tuesday 31 January, the Court of Justice of the European Union concluded that member states can refuse to grant refugee status to an individual who has participated in the activities of a terrorist network, even though the individual has not personally committed acts of terrorism or has not been the instigator of them.
Upstream of this Court ruling, legal interpretations varied significantly in its regard (C-573/14) and with respect to the Moroccan national sentenced in Belgium for having provided logistical support in sending volunteers to Iraq and participating in the activities of the terrorist Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group’ (‘the MICG’)
On his release from prison, he successfully submitted a request for asylum to Belgian authorities. The Council of State in the country ultimately decided that nothing in the conduct in respect of which he had been convicted reached the required degree of gravity to be categorised as “acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations’ within the meaning of the directive on refugee status”.
This was also the interpretation of Advocate General, Eleanor Sharpston, in May 2016 (see EUROPE 11562) provided to the Court. The latter argued in her conclusion that simply belonging to a terrorist organisation was not enough to automatically exclude an asylum seeker from requesting refugee status given that it is incumbent on the national authorities to decide whether the interested party was indeed the actual perpetrator of an act of terrorism or had contributed to one.
The judges at the Court have finally reached a decision: logical support is an act that is sufficiently serious to be categorised as “contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations’ within the meaning of the directive on refugee status”, which can in itself justify rejection of a request for asylum. In this regard, they drew on a United Nations Security Council resolution on threats posed by “foreign terrorist combatants” (2178).
The judges clarified what sort of support this could and entail. This could involve individuals “who engage in activities of recruitment, organisation, transportation or equipment of individuals who travel to a State other than their States of residence or nationality for the purpose of, inter alia, the perpetration, planning or preparation of terrorist acts". In the case in point, the individual was particularly involved in counterfeiting passports.
Even though the final assessment of a request for international protection is still incumbent on the relevant national authorities, under the jurisdiction of the national courts, the court of Justice of the European Union sought to highlight the circumstances that should be taken into account in this kind of situation. It particularly emphasised the fact that the asylum seeker belonged to a group that was internationally recognised as being a terrorist organisation and the fact that this asylum seeker had provided logistical support of an international nature for which he had ultimately been convicted. (Original version in French by Jan Kordys)