Belgian Conseil d'Etat refers to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling in Diakite Case C-285/12

The reference pertains to the interpretation of Article 15(c) of Directive 2004/83/EC and the clarification of the definition of "internal armed conflict". The Court essentially asks whether the definition of armed conflict under Article 15(c) should be linked to international humanitarian law or whether it should be interpreted autonomously. In the latter case, the Conseil d'Etat also asks what should be the criteria for such an autonomous interpretation.

Demande de décision préjudicielle - Conseil d'État (Belgique) - Interprétation de l’article 15, sous c), de la Directive 2004/83/CE du Conseil, du 29 avril 2004, concernant les normes minimales relatives aux conditions que doivent remplir les ressortissants des pays tiers ou les apatrides pour pouvoir prétendre au statut de réfugié ou les personnes qui, pour d'autres raisons, ont besoin d'une protection internationale, et relatives au contenu de ces statuts (JO L 304, p. 12) - Refus d’octroi du statut de réfugié et de protection subsidiaire - Personne pouvant bénéficier de la protection subsidiaire - Notion de « conflit armé interne » - Interprétation autonome spécifique ou admissibilité d’une interprétation conforme à celle du droit international humanitaire - Critères d’appréciation

Official translation of the questions referred in Case C-285/12 Diakite

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Conseil d'État (Belgium) – Interpretation of Article 15(c) of Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third-country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted. (OJ 2004 L 304, p. 12) – Refusal to grant refugee status and subsidiary protection – Person eligible for subsidiary protection – Concept of ‘internal armed conflict’ – Specific independent interpretation or permissibility of an interpretation consistent with that under international humanitarian law – Criteria for assessment

Referring court: Conseil d'État

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Aboubacar Diakite

Defendant: Commissaire général aux réfugiés et aux apatrides

Question referred:

1)Must Article 15(c) of Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees, or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted,  be interpreted as meaning that that provision offers protection only in a situation of 'internal armed conflict', as interpreted by international humanitarian law and, in particular, by reference to Common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 (for the Amelioration of the Conditions of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, for the Amelioration of the Conditions of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, on the Treatment of Prisoners of War, and on the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, respectively)?

2)If the concept of 'internal armed conflict' referred to in Article 15(c) of Directive 2004/83 is to be given an interpretation independent of Common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, what, in that case, are the criteria for determining whether such an 'internal armed conflict' exists?

This item was reproduced with the permission of ECRE from the weekly ELENA legal update supported by the Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Funding Programme and distributed by email. The purpose of these updates is to inform asylum lawyers and legal organizations supporting asylum seekers and refugees of recent developments in the field of asylum law. Please note that the information provided is taken from publicly available information on the internet. Every reasonable effort is made to make the content accurate and up to date at the time each item is published but no responsibility for its accuracy and correctness, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed by ECRE, the IRC or its partners.