France - CNDA, 30 October 2009, M.P., n°640035/08020515
Machine-found from the cited source, not yet confirmed by a human. Open the source before relying on it.
What was at stake
EDAL summary. The practices used by the authorities of a given country in order to exclude some citizens, members of a minority, from nationality can be considered as persecution since they are linked to one of the...
What happened
The applicant, a member of the Nepali-speaking minority in Bhutan, faced severe repression from the Bhutanese government, which imposed a single language and traditional dress while promoting the Buddhist religion. After being expelled to India, he lived in New Delhi where he feared arrest due to his irregular status. He eventually fled to France and applied for asylum after his application was rejected by the French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (Ofpra).
What the court decided
The CNDA held that the Bhutanese authorities' practice of excluding members of the Nepali‑speaking minority from nationality constitutes persecution under Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Refugee Convention, and therefore the applicant could not rely on protection from Bhutan and was entitled to refugee status in France.
How the court got there
The CNDA determined that the applicant could not seek protection from the Bhutanese authorities, as they continued to refuse the return of Nepali-speaking citizens who had been exiled since 1990. The court found that the practices employed by the Bhutanese government to exclude members of this minority from nationality constituted persecution under Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Refugee Convention.
Statutes and cases cited
- § 1951 Refugee Convention art. 1A(2)
- § Qualification Directive
Categories
Authoritative link
This is a research and reference resource, not legal advice. Summaries are prepared from public sources and may be incomplete or out of date. Always read the original judgment or document and consult a qualified lawyer in the relevant jurisdiction before acting.
Narrative summaries on this page are licensed CC BY-NC 4.0. Reuse them with attribution to JusticeHub for non-commercial purposes. Original judgments and source documents remain under their own terms; follow the authoritative link for the source of record.