Paragraph C3/3

The IND shall assess the application for an asylum residence permit with due observance of Article 4 of the Qualification Regulation and Article 34 of the Procedures Regulation.

Article 9 of the Qualification Regulation describes what is understood by acts of persecution.

Article 6 of the Qualification Regulation describes what is understood by actors of persecution or serious harm.

Pursuant to Article 5 of the Qualification Regulation, the IND may grant an asylum residence permit to the foreign national who has demonstrated a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of suffering serious harm due to:

The need for international protection is designated as having arisen sur place.

The IND assesses, on the basis of generally available information, statements made by the foreign national and any supporting evidence, whether the foreign national faces problems upon return and whether those problems are so serious that they must be considered acts of persecution or give cause to assume a real risk of serious harm. Regarding the question of whether the foreign national may be expected to exercise restraint, reference is made to what is described below with respect to political opinion, religion, and sexual orientation and gender aspects.

Even if the activities of the foreign national, which the foreign national has undertaken after his departure from the country of origin, do not follow from activities that the foreign national had already undertaken in the country of origin prior to his departure, the foreign national may have a need for protection arising sur place (see also Article 5, paragraph 1, opening words and under (b), Qualification Regulation). This may be the case if the foreign national satisfies the following conditions:

The foreign national who is deemed to have a well-founded fear of persecution or to face a real risk of serious harm may be denied an asylum residence permit if the foreign national has himself created the circumstances on which the risk of persecution or serious harm is based after he has left the country of origin with the sole or main purpose of creating the conditions for qualifying for international protection (see Article 5, second paragraph, Qualification Regulation).

The IND must state the reasons based on which facts and circumstances it follows that the objective and subjective requirements have been met, whereby it is plausible that the foreign national has artificially created the conditions for himself, solely with the single or principal aim of thus qualifying for international protection. The mere circumstance that the events take place after leaving the country of origin does not in itself constitute a reason to apply Article 5, paragraph 2, of the Qualification Regulation.

The application of Article 5, paragraph 2, of the Qualification Regulation and the resulting withholding of an asylum residence permit cannot prejudice the principle of non-refoulement as laid down in Article 3 ECHR and Articles 4 and 19, paragraph 2, of the EU Charter.

The IND shall not process an application for an asylum residence permit from a foreign national who presents himself for protection at a Dutch diplomatic or consular representation in his country of origin or a third country. The foreign national shall be referred by the official of the Dutch diplomatic or consular representation to the authorities of the third country where the foreign national is located or to the UNHCR or UNDP.

Article 3, paragraph 5, of the Qualification Regulation governs what is understood by a ‘refugee’.

Article 13 of the Qualification Regulation in conjunction with Article 24 of the Qualification Regulation stipulates that a residence permit must be granted as long as a foreign national holds refugee status. Article 14, paragraph 2, of the Qualification Regulation provides that the IND may, in certain situations, decide not to grant refugee status. The granting of an asylum residence permit is regulated in Article 29 of the Aliens Act (Vw).

A foreign national shall be excluded from recognition as a refugee on the basis of Article 12 of the Qualification Regulation in the following cases:

The IND shall not grant a residence permit for asylum to the foreign national if one of these grounds for exclusion occurs.

The IND shall not grant the foreign national an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29, paragraph 1, of the Aliens Act (Vreemdelingenwet), if he falls within the scope of Article 1D of the Refugee Convention. The IND shall, however, proceed to assess the application against Article 29a, paragraph 1, of the Aliens Act.

Article 1D of the Refugee Convention is applicable in current practice to the (stateless) Palestinian refugee who falls under the mandate of UNRWA. The mandate of UNRWA is applicable to five areas: Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip.

To be eligible for assistance from UNRWA, a person must:

For the foreign national who does not fall under the mandate of UNRWA, the regular asylum policy is applicable.

In two consecutive steps, the IND assesses whether a Palestinian refugee, originating from one of the five UNRWA mandate areas, is excluded from refugee status. These steps are:

Article 1D must be interpreted so strictly that it does not relate to persons who were or are eligible for protection or assistance from UNRWA, but who have not invoked it.

It is also of importance to assess whether the foreign national actually invoked or enjoyed the protection or assistance of the UNRWA shortly before submitting the asylum application. Only these foreign nationals fall within the scope of Article 1D.

The assessment of whether and to what extent the foreign national has enjoyed assistance from the UNRWA is an individual assessment, whereby it is relevant what the protection or assistance from the UNRWA consisted of in the individual case of the foreign national.

For the assumption of previously enjoyed (or invoked) protection or assistance, registration with UNRWA is not a requirement. It is, however, a strong indication that the foreign national falls within the scope of that article.

It is relevant whether the foreign national has left the mandate area voluntarily or by compulsion, but also whether the circumstances have changed in the meantime.

There are two conceivable situations in which the protection or assistance is considered to have ceased outside the influence of the foreign national:

The assessment concerns an ex-nunc examination. Therefore, an assessment of the situation at the time of departure from the country of habitual residence shall not suffice.

The assessment of whether UNRWA can fulfil its mandate is, in principle, an individual one. The protection or assistance must notably be deemed to have ceased when UNRWA is unable to guarantee a specific applicant (verzoeker) dignified living conditions and a minimum level of security, taking into account any vulnerabilities. This refers to living conditions that do not guarantee the foreign national that, in accordance with UNRWA's mission, basic needs in the areas of healthcare, education, and subsistence are met.

In addition, a situation is conceivable in which UNRWA is unable to guarantee humane living conditions or minimum safety to any (stateless) Palestinian. This is the case if, in the relevant area of operations, every stateless Palestinian would end up in a situation of extreme material deprivation that renders them unable to provide for their most basic needs, such as food, hygiene, and access to housing.

It is in principle for the foreign national to demonstrate that he cannot once again invoke the protection or assistance he has previously received.

The primary issue here is whether the foreign national has left the territory voluntarily. If the foreign national has not been compelled to leave the territory against his will, it is not plausible that the protection or assistance has ceased beyond the influence of the foreign national.

Forced departure may occur, inter alia, if the foreign national:

Even if circumstances have arisen after departure from the country of origin as a result of which the foreign national cannot proceed to the mandate area, it may be assumed that the protection or assistance has ceased for reasons beyond the control of the foreign national. In the case of voluntary departure, it is for the foreign national to provide a prima facie case for this.

If there is a case of involuntary departure, but subsequently the living conditions in the relevant mandate area have improved, this may also be taken into account in the assessment. This may (still) lead to exclusion on the basis of Article 1D of the Convention. The burden of proof lies with the IND.

In the context of the application of Article 1D of the Refugee Convention, the IND, when assessing the asylum application, is not required to assess whether the foreign national can gain access to the UNRWA area where he previously resided.

In determining whether the foreign national can obtain protection or assistance from UNRWA in a mandate area other than the mandate area where he had his habitual residence, factual accessibility does play a role. If the foreign national is not admitted to the other mandate area, it cannot be held against him that he can invoke the protection or assistance of UNRWA there.

The IND grants an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29, first paragraph, of the Aliens Act (Vw) if the foreign national:

The IND shall not grant an asylum residence permit if the foreign national:

The IND shall not grant an asylum residence permit if the (stateless) Palestinian foreign national has been guilty of acts as referred to in the exclusion clause of Article 1F of the Refugee Convention.

This article relates to foreign nationals who would otherwise qualify for refugee status and who have been received in a country where they have been granted most of the rights usually enjoyed by nationals, but where they do not have formal citizenship.

Article 12, paragraph 2, of the Qualification Directive stipulates that a third-country national or a stateless person shall be excluded from recognition as a refugee if there are serious grounds for considering that a foreign national has committed war crimes or other serious crimes. This corresponds to the text of Article 1F of the Refugee Convention. For this reason, the Aliens Circular (Vreemdelingencirculaire) continues to refer to Article 1F of the Refugee Convention (or simply 1F).

The IND shall in that case not grant the foreign national an asylum residence permit (see paragraph C4/3.6.2 Vc).

There is a case of group persecution if, in a country of origin, a group of foreign nationals is systematically subjected to persecution on one of the grounds of Article 10 of the Qualification Regulation.

The Minister may designate a group for which there is a case of group persecution. Situations in which there is a case of group persecution shall be included in the country-specific policy.

The individualisation requirement also applies to the foreign national who relies on group persecution. The foreign national must demonstrate that he belongs to the group of foreign nationals for whom group persecution is assumed.

As set out in paragraph C3/2.4 Vc, the Minister may designate risk profiles in connection with the situation in a country.

The IND assesses an application for an asylum residence permit with due observance of Article 10 of the Qualification Regulation. The grounds for persecution are further elaborated below.

The IND grants an asylum residence permit pursuant to Article 29, paragraph 1, of the Vw, if there are acts of persecution as referred to in Article 9 of the Qualification Regulation.

In the paragraphs below, the following grounds from Article 10 of the Qualification Regulation are further elaborated:

For the assessment of the grounds of race, which specifically includes the aspects of skin colour, descent or belonging to a particular ethnic group, and nationality, no separate framework is elaborated. The assessment follows the general systematic approach.

The concept of ‘religion’ encompasses a wide range of beliefs, in particular theistic, non-theistic and atheistic (religious) beliefs. The circumstance that the foreign national cannot practice his religion in his country of origin in the same manner as in the Netherlands constitutes insufficient grounds to grant the foreign national an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29, paragraph 1, of the Aliens Act (Vreemdelingenwet).

Not every infringement of the right to freedom of religion will therefore constitute an act of persecution within the meaning of Article 10 of the Qualification Regulation. In assessing whether an infringement of the right to freedom of religion constitutes an act of persecution, the IND must, having regard to the personal situation of the foreign national against the background of what is known from general information, examine whether the foreign national runs a real risk of being persecuted in his country of origin for reasons of the exercise of that freedom.

The IND shall, in the assessment of the application for an asylum residence permit, in any event take into account that:

The IND assesses whether the measures and sanctions that will be taken against the foreign national if, upon return to his country of origin, he performs certain acts – which are of particular importance to his religious identity – are sufficiently serious to constitute persecution.

Even if the foreign national makes it plausible that upon return he feels compelled to exercise his religious belief with restraint due to the risks he would otherwise face, this may constitute persecution within the meaning of Article 10 of the Qualification Regulation.

In the assessment of the grounds within the meaning of Article 10 of the Qualification Regulation, account shall be taken of the circumstance that a social group is concerned. A group shall be deemed to form a social group if members of a group satisfy at least two cumulative conditions.

Firstly, the members of a social group must satisfy at least one of the following conditions:

Secondly, the social group in the country of origin must have a distinct identity because it is perceived as being different by the surrounding society.

The individualisation requirement as set out in paragraph C3/2.3 Vc is applicable. In addition, paragraph C3/4 Vc (assessment of the asylum application) is also applicable.

Women in general, as well as a limited group of women sharing a specific common characteristic, may, depending on the circumstances in the country of origin or in a specific area within that country, be identified as a social group.

The following elements may be of particular relevance for the assessment of whether women constitute a social group:

In this regard, it shall be assessed whether the group to which the woman belongs possesses its own identity in the country of origin, because this group is regarded as distinct in its immediate environment.

The Minister may, in the context of specific country policy, determine whether (a group of) women belongs to a social group. If such is the case, this shall also be included in the country policy of Chapter C9 Vc.

Insofar as (a specific group of) women belong to a social group, gender-based violence against these women may, among other things, lead to the conclusion that there is a case for recognition as a refugee as referred to in Article 13 of the Qualification Directive, if that violence can be qualified as an act of persecution as referred to in Article 9 of the Qualification Directive. Regarding the question of whether a woman, as a member of a social group, qualifies for an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29, first paragraph, of the Aliens Act (Vreemdelingenwet), the individualisation requirement as described in paragraph C3/2.3 of the Aliens Circular (Vreemdelingencirculaire) applies in full. It shall be assessed on an individual basis whether she actually has a well-founded fear of acts of persecution due to belonging to a social group.

Women who actually identify with the fundamental value of equality between women and men (hereinafter: identification) may, depending on the circumstances in the country of origin, belong to a ‘social group’. In this regard, it is important that the provisions of paragraph C3/3.2.5.2 Vc are also applicable to the question of whether a woman who invokes identification belongs to a social group.

Membership of this social group may constitute a ground for assuming that there is a case for recognition as a refugee as referred to in Article 13 of the Qualification Regulation. It is for the woman who invokes identification to make it plausible that this is the case in her personal situation.

The IND assesses, on the basis of a ‘three-stage assessment’, whether a woman has made it plausible that there is a well-founded fear of persecution due to belonging to a social group on account of identification:

The IND must first determine whether the woman has, in her individual case, made it plausible that the identification can be traced back to the fundamental value that the woman attaches to the equality between women and men.

In determining whether there is a case of identification, consideration may be given to the making of autonomous and independent choices that are decisive for her identity in the fields of education and professional career, the possibility of becoming economically independent by working outside the home, the decision to live alone or in a family context, and the choice of partner.

In assessing whether there is a case of identification (vereenzelviging), the IND shall, in any event, take into account:

In this regard, it applies that if the woman gives or has given little to no practical expression to the identification, it may be expected of the woman that she can explain why this is the case and why the identification is nevertheless fundamental to her identity.

For the woman who invokes identification, the alleged identification need not stem from political or religious motives. Insofar as this does occur in practice, reference is made to paragraphs C3/3.2.5.1 and C3/3.2.5.3 Vc.

If the IND has ruled that a credible identification has occurred, the next step in the assessment shall be proceeded to.

Subsequently, the IND shall assess whether the woman, as a result of the identification, can belong to a social group. In order to be designated as a social group, the woman must demonstrate that she belongs to a group which, as a result of the identification, possesses a distinct identity because it is perceived as being different in the immediate environment in the country of origin.

This in particular as a result of the social, moral or legal norms prevailing in the country of origin.

The IND assesses the plausibility of the woman's statements regarding why the group is considered deviant, in conjunction with the available country information.

Subsequently, the IND shall assess whether there is a well-founded fear of persecution on account of (imputed) membership of a social group due to identification. The IND shall assess the fear of persecution on the basis of statements and evidence provided by the woman regarding what she claims to fear upon return to the country of origin.

The fact that a reason to be persecuted on account of imputation could be avoided by adopting a reserved attitude shall not be held against the woman in this context. Indeed, the woman may not be required to renounce an imputation that is fundamental.

The IND grants a woman, who invokes a fear of female genital mutilation, an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29, paragraph 1, of the Aliens Act (Vw), if all of the following conditions are met:

The IND assesses, on the basis of the individual statements of the foreign national, whether the foreign national is eligible for an asylum residence permit pursuant to Article 29, first paragraph, of the Vw (Aliens Act) due to a well-founded fear of female genital mutilation.

The IND shall take into account the general information regarding female genital mutilation in the country of origin. This may be evidenced, for example, by an official report (ambtsbericht) from the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Insofar as the parent of a girl or woman who has reason to fear female genital mutilation claims to be eligible for protection on the basis of an (attributed) conviction, it may be assessed whether the parent independently qualifies for an asylum residence permit on the basis of a religious conviction, membership of a social group and/or a political conviction.

The IND shall in any event not grant an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29, first paragraph, of the Aliens Act (Vreemdelingenwet), on the grounds of an invoked fear of female genital mutilation (of a family member), to the parent who performs the genital mutilation themselves or facilitates the performance thereof.

The IND may designate a foreign national as a member of a particular social group if he belongs to a group that has (imputed) sexual orientation as a common characteristic.

Sexual orientation concerns, in any event, a person's sexual and/or emotional and/or intimate attraction to another person. In this regard, the IND shall assess whether this group has a distinct identity in the country of origin, because this group is perceived in the immediate environment as deviating from the heterosexual norm.

The IND investigates the sexual orientation of the foreign national and the expression thereof on the basis of the assessment framework of paragraphs C3/4.3 and C3/4.4 Vc. The circumstance that the foreign national cannot express his sexual orientation in his country of origin in the same manner as in the Netherlands does not, in itself, constitute sufficient grounds to assume that there is a well-founded fear of persecution. Not every infringement of the right to express sexual orientation constitutes an act of persecution within the meaning of the Refugee Convention. For the assessment of whether an infringement of this right constitutes an act of persecution, the IND must investigate whether the foreign national has a well-founded fear of being persecuted in his country of origin.

The IND shall, with due observance of Article 9 of the Qualification Directive, grant an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29, paragraph 1, of the Aliens Act (Vreemdelingenwet) to a foreign national on the basis of their sexual orientation, in any case if at least one of the following situations occurs:

In the assessment of whether there is a case of penal provisions and/or discriminatory measures relating to sexual orientation, the IND shall, in any event, take into account:

If the sexual orientation or sexual acts is/are punishable in the country of origin, the foreign national is not expected to invoke or be able to invoke protection in accordance with Article 7 of the Qualification Regulation.

In the assessment of the individual situation of the foreign national, the starting point is that the foreign national is not required to conceal his sexual orientation in his country of origin, including in the situation where the foreign national concealed his sexual orientation prior to his departure from the country of origin. The IND shall investigate the manner in which the foreign national expresses his sexual orientation in the Netherlands and how the foreign national intends to express it in his country of origin. The foreign national must demonstrate that it is plausible that this expression will lead to an act of persecution.

The IND does not require the foreign national to exercise restraint in the expression of their sexual orientation and, for that reason, consistently applies a certain ‘lower limit’ (ondergrens) when assessing the risk of persecution. The lower limit entails the factual expression of one's own orientation and entering into relationships in a manner that is not substantially different from what is accepted for heterosexuals in the relevant country of origin. The IND expects no restraint in such expression. In those cases, when assessing the risk of persecution, the IND assumes in principle that the immediate social environment, as mentioned above, is aware or may become aware of the sexual orientation. The IND subsequently assesses whether the expression in accordance with the lower limit would lead to persecution.

If the foreign national indicates a desire to express their sexual orientation in a manner that goes beyond this ‘lower limit’, the IND shall assess the credibility of this expression and the IND shall assess the manner in which the foreign national intends to express their sexual orientation in their country of origin. In the situation where the sexual orientation is deemed credible but the further-reaching manner in which the foreign national wishes to express it is not, the IND shall examine whether giving effect to the sexual orientation in accordance with the ‘lower limit’ would lead to persecution. In that situation, the foreign national may be eligible for an asylum permit, even if a part of the statement (the expression of the orientation in a manner that goes beyond the ‘lower limit’) is considered not plausible.

The IND shall include in its assessment whether there is discriminatory treatment in the country of origin on the grounds of sexual orientation, measured against the norms and customs prevailing there. If sexual orientation or sexual acts are criminalised in the country of origin, the IND shall assess how this is dealt with in practice and measure this against the personal situation of the foreign national.

If the foreign national relies on both their sexual orientation and their gender identity and/or gender expression, paragraph C3/3.2.5.2.3 Vc shall also apply.

The IND may designate a foreign national as a member of a social group if he belongs to a group that has as a common characteristic that the deeply felt, personal experience of his gender and/or his body does not, or does not unambiguously, correspond to the sex he was assigned at birth, or if this is attributed to him. This may also concern gender expression. Gender expression refers to the manner in which the foreign national presents his gender by means of physical appearance – including but not limited to clothing, hairstyles, accessories, cosmetics – and manners, speech, patterns of behaviour, names and personal references. This does not necessarily have to correspond to the gender identity. In addition, the IND shall assess whether this group has a distinct identity in the country of origin because this group is perceived as being different by the surrounding society.

If the foreign national relies solely on gender expression, which is distinct from gender identity, the IND shall assess whether the forms of expression are so fundamental to the identity that the foreign national cannot be expected to adapt to the norms and customs prevailing in the country of origin as referred to in C3/3.2.5.2 Vc.

The IND shall investigate the gender identity and/or the gender expression of the foreign national on the basis of the assessment framework of paragraphs C3/4.3 and C3/4.4 Vc. The circumstance that the foreign national cannot express his gender identity and/or gender expression in his country of origin in the same manner as in the Netherlands does not, in itself, constitute sufficient grounds to assume that there is a well-founded fear of persecution. Not every infringement of the right to express gender identity and/or gender expression constitutes an act of persecution within the meaning of the Refugee Convention.

For the assessment of whether an infringement of this right constitutes an act of persecution, the IND examines whether the foreign national has a well-founded fear of being persecuted in their country of origin. Article 9 of the Qualification Directive describes what is understood by acts of persecution. These must be so severe in nature or occur so frequently that they constitute a serious violation of fundamental human rights or be an accumulation of various measures, including human rights violations, which are sufficiently severe to affect an individual in a similar manner.

The IND considers discrimination by the authorities and by fellow citizens as an act of persecution if the foreign national, due to the discrimination, is so severely restricted in his means of subsistence that it is impossible for him to function in a societal and social capacity. For the assessment of whether discrimination is of such a severe nature that it constitutes persecution, the IND applies the assessment framework of paragraph C3/3.2.6 Vc.

The IND shall, with due observance of Article 9 of the Qualification Regulation, grant an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29, paragraph 1, of the Aliens Act (Vw) to a foreign national on the basis of their gender identity and/or gender expression, if at least one of the following situations is in any case present:

If there are acts of violence and/or discrimination directed at the foreign national on the grounds of gender identity and/or gender expression in the country of origin, the acts, individually or in conjunction with other acts, must be sufficiently serious to constitute an act of persecution, and no protection against such acts must be available from the authorities or international organisations, as referred to in paragraph C3/3.4 Vc.

In the event that the foreign national demonstrates that upon return to the country of origin he will be detained for a reason other than his gender identity and/or gender expression, he must demonstrate that he faces a real risk in detention of being subjected to serious (sexual) violence because of his gender identity and/or gender expression, against which the (detention) authorities cannot or will not offer protection. In this regard, the IND shall take into account whether the situation will arise where the foreign national is detained with persons of a sex that does not correspond to his gender identity. If a common crime is concerned, it must be assessed whether there is a threat to public order. For this purpose, the assessment framework as referred to in paragraph C4/3.6 Vc shall apply.

The IND investigates whether the foreign national, upon return, would be compelled under threat (of violence) by an actor to perform a certain form of labour (such as sex work) and whether this is related to their gender identity and/or gender expression, as a result of which they face discriminatory or disproportionate punishment due to this form of labour. In the situation where there is a case of (a form of) discrimination, the assessment framework, as referred to in paragraph C3/3.2.6 Vc, shall apply.

The mere fact that no possibilities exist to have the gender adjusted in official documents (legal recognition), or that this is subject to the condition that a gender reassignment has taken place, is in itself insufficient to assume a well-founded fear of persecution. This is without prejudice to the fact that the consequences for the foreign national of being unable to adjust the gender may lead to measures which, individually or cumulatively, are so serious that such treatment reaches the threshold of persecution.

In assessing whether there is a case of penal provisions and/or discriminatory measures relating to gender identity or gender expression, the IND shall, in any event, take into account:

If gender expression or the manifestation of gender identity, other than the prevailing norms in the country of origin, is punishable by law (or if other penal provisions apply thereto), the foreign national shall not be expected to invoke protection, or be deemed able to invoke protection, in accordance with Article 7 of the Qualification Directive.

The IND shall include in its assessment whether there is discriminatory treatment in the country of origin on the grounds of gender identity and/or gender expression. If the country of origin criminalises gender expression or the expression of a gender identity other than that assigned to the foreign national at birth, the IND shall assess how this is handled in practice and weigh this against the personal situation of the foreign national.

If the foreign national makes it plausible that they are excluded, in whole or in part, from access to healthcare in the country of origin on the basis of their gender identity and/or gender expression, the IND shall investigate whether this leads to serious consequences. The IND shall assess this in conjunction with the question of whether there is a discriminatory treatment or measure which, in combination with other measures, is sufficiently serious to constitute persecution. The mere fact that no gender-affirming care is available does not in itself constitute a reason to assume a well-founded fear of persecution.

In the assessment of the individual situation of the foreign national, the starting point is that the foreign national is not required to conceal their gender identity in their country of origin, even in the situation where the foreign national concealed their gender identity prior to their departure from the country of origin. The IND investigates the manner in which the foreign national expresses their gender identity in the Netherlands and how the foreign national intends to express it in their country of origin. This may also concern gender expression. The foreign national must demonstrate that this expression leads to an act of persecution. In those cases, the IND, in principle, assumes in the assessment of the risk of persecution that the immediate environment as mentioned above is aware or may become aware of the gender identity and/or gender expression.

If the foreign national relies on both their gender identity and gender expression as well as their sexual orientation, paragraph C3/3.2.5.2.2 Vc regarding sexual orientation shall also apply.

Article 10, paragraph 1, opening words and under (e), of the Qualification Regulation determines what must be understood by the ground of persecution ‘political opinion’.

The first question that the IND must answer when a foreign national puts forward their political opinion as a ground for asylum is whether there is indeed a case of a political opinion. A political opinion may consist of a view, thought, or opinion directed against the authorities of the country of origin. This does not necessarily have to concern a deeply rooted political opinion.

The strength of the conviction plays no role in the question of whether there is a political conviction, but remains relevant in the assessment of whether the foreign national faces a risk upon return.

The IND assesses whether the strength of the political conviction and any activities performed by the foreign national to express that conviction have resulted in the foreign national attracting or potentially attracting the negative attention of the authorities of the country of origin and what the consequences thereof would be. This assessment takes place on the basis of the individual statements of the foreign national in combination with the available general information regarding the situation in the country of origin.

Furthermore, in the assessment of the fear, the IND involves which activities motivated by the alleged political opinion and found plausible the foreign national would wish to perform upon return or how the foreign national would otherwise wish to express his view, opinion or thought, and what the consequences thereof would be.

The circumstance that the foreign national is unable to express his political conviction in his country of origin in the same manner as in the Netherlands constitutes insufficient grounds to grant the foreign national an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29, paragraph 1, of the Aliens Act (Vreemdelingenwet).

The IND shall, in any event, take into account the following when assessing the application for a residence permit:

The IND assesses, even in the absence of a political opinion, whether the political activities or expressions performed by the foreign national in their country of origin, the Netherlands, or elsewhere have become or will become known to the authorities and, as such, on the basis of an imputed political opinion, constitute sufficient grounds to assume a well-founded fear of persecution upon return.

The IND shall designate discrimination against the foreign national by the authorities and by fellow citizens as an act of persecution within the meaning of Article 9 of the Qualification Directive, if the foreign national, due to the discrimination, is so severely restricted in his means of subsistence that it is impossible for him to function in a societal and social capacity.

Discrimination against the foreign national in the country of origin may lead to exclusion from medical care. The IND shall grant a residence permit for asylum on the basis of Article 29, first paragraph, of the Aliens Act (Vw), on the grounds of exclusion from medical care, to the foreign national who meets all of the following conditions:

The IND assesses the question of whether there are serious medical consequences on the basis of the criteria in Chapter B8 Vc. The IND includes in the question of whether there is an exclusion of medical care on the basis of one of the grounds of Article 10 of the Qualification Directive:

If the foreign national asserts to fear persecution on account of refusal of military service or desertion, the IND first assesses whether the foreign national has refused military service or has deserted because he feared otherwise having to participate in war crimes (see Article 9, paragraph 2, introductory wording and point (e), of the Qualification Regulation). Only if this is not the case does the IND assess whether refusal of military service or desertion leads to disproportionate or discriminatory punishment, or whether it arises from insurmountable conscientious objections due to a religion or other deep-rooted conviction. The fact that that foreign national refuses to perform his military service or has deserted and in connection therewith is punished with a prison sentence or dismissal from the army, is in itself insufficient for the IND to designate as an act of persecution.

The IND grants, applying Article 9, paragraph 2, opening words and under (e), of the Qualification Regulation and in accordance with the foregoing, an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29, paragraph 1, of the Vw to the foreign national who invokes a refusal to perform military service or desertion, if the foreign national meets at least one of the following conditions:

The IND assesses all applications for an asylum residence permit individually and on the basis of the applicable asylum policy, even if the foreign national has previously been recognised as a Convention refugee by the UNHCR on individual grounds.

The IND shall provide the foreign national with the opportunity to submit information regarding the UNHCR recognition during the procedure and shall recognisably include this information in the decision-making process.

The IND shall not grant an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29, paragraph 1, or Article 29a, paragraph 1, Vw, if all of the following conditions apply:

An ordinary offence is an offence that cannot be traced back to one of the grounds of Article 10 of the Qualification Regulation, and without there being a disproportionate or discriminatory measure on account of one of the grounds of Article 10 of the Qualification Regulation.

The common crime must be included in the substantive assessment and the question of whether there is a threat to public order. In this regard, see paragraph C4/3.6 Vc.

The IND grants an asylum residence permit pursuant to Article 29a, paragraph 1, of the Vw if, upon the removal of the foreign national from the Netherlands, there is a real risk of serious harm within the meaning of Article 15 of the Qualification Regulation.

The real risk of serious harm may be present at the time of the foreign national's departure from the country of origin, but may also arise after the foreign national's departure from the country of origin (see Article 5 Qualification Regulation and paragraph C3/3.1.4 Vc).

The IND shall not grant an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29a, paragraph 1, of the Aliens Act (Vreemdelingenwet), if Article 17 of the Qualification Regulation (Kwalificatieverordening) is applicable.

Article 15 of the Qualification Regulation sets out what serious harm may consist of, namely:

In the assessment, it is of importance that all relevant elements relating to the individual situation and the general situation in the country of origin are first examined, before it is determined whether the risk falls under Article 15, introductory wording and under (a), (b) or (c) of the Qualification Regulation.

For the establishment of a real risk of serious harm on the basis of Article 15, introductory description and under (a) and (b), of the Qualification Regulation, a fully individual assessment is required. Country information may give cause to assume systematic exposure with regard to a group or to designate groups as having a risk profile as included in paragraph C3/2.4 of the Aliens Circular (Vreemdelingencirculaire).

With regard to the individualisation requirement under Article 15, introductory wording and point (c), of the Qualification Regulation, reference is made to paragraph C3/3.3.3 Vc.

In paragraph C3/3.3.2 Vc, serious harm is described as referred to in Article 15, opening words and points (a) and (b), of the Qualification Regulation. The subjects described thereunder are:

In paragraph C3/3.3.3 Vc, serious harm is described as referred to in Article 15, opening words and point (c), of the Qualification Regulation.

If the foreign national belongs to a group that is systematically exposed to a real risk of serious harm as referred to in Article 15, introductory description and under (a) and (b), of the Qualification Regulation, the individualisation requirement is limited to demonstrating that the person belongs to that group. In the case of systematic exposure, there must be evidence of targeted violence against the group concerned.

The Minister shall assess, on the basis of the situation in a country of origin, whether there is systematic exposure to serious harm as referred to in Article 15, opening words and points (a) and (b), of the Qualification Regulation. It may be set out in the country-specific policy whether there is systematic exposure with respect to a group in a particular country.

Expulsion of the foreign national may, in connection with the medical situation, lead to a violation of Article 3 ECHR under exceptional circumstances. The IND assesses whether there is a violation of Article 3 ECHR due to medical reasons within the framework of the ex officio assessment of whether a postponement of departure must be granted pursuant to Article 64 of the Aliens Act (Vreemdelingenwet).

In this situation, no asylum residence permit shall be granted on the basis of Article 29a of the Aliens Act (Vreemdelingenwet). If no ex officio assessment takes place, but the asylum decision must also be designated as a return decision, the IND shall—within the framework of that return decision—likewise assess whether there is a violation of Article 3 of the ECHR due to medical reasons.

If the IND rejects an application for an asylum residence permit or withdraws an asylum residence permit, there may be an impediment to return. As a rule, the IND assesses whether there is a situation in which the foreign national, upon return to the country of origin:

If Article 1F of the Refugee Convention is applicable (Article 12, paragraphs 2 to 5 inclusive, Qualification Regulation), it shall not be assessed whether there is a risk of persecution.

If one of the aforementioned situations occurs or if there is a violation of Article 3 ECHR due to medical reasons and there is no other country to which the foreign national can return, the IND shall not issue a return decision. The IND shall then state in the decision that the foreign national must depart from the Netherlands independently, but will not be deported to the country of origin. The IND shall not specify a final period for departure in the decision.

If, due to an impediment to return, no return decision and consequently no entry ban can be issued, the IND shall assess whether a decision for an alert (signalering) may be imposed. Paragraph A4/4 of the Aliens Circular (Vc) sets forth the conditions for imposing a decision for an alert on the grounds of a threat to public order or national security.

If it is established at a later stage that the foreign national no longer has a fear of persecution or serious harm, or that Article 3 ECHR no longer precludes the deportation of the foreign national, the IND shall issue a return decision and, where applicable, shall impose a decision on signaling, a declaration of undesirability and/or an entry ban. The IND shall notify the foreign national of this decision. The foreign national may exercise legal remedies against this decision.

The IND may grant an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29a, paragraph 1, of the Aliens Act (Vreemdelingenwet) if there is a real risk of serious harm pursuant to Article 15, introductory description and under (c), of the Qualification Regulation.

The Minister may, on the basis of available country information, determine whether there is a situation of indiscriminate violence in a particular country or territory within the framework of an international or internal armed conflict. An international or internal armed conflict exists if the regular armed forces of a state are opposed to one or more armed groups, or when two or more armed groups are opposed to each other.

If the Minister has determined that there is an international or internal armed conflict within the meaning of Article 15, opening words and under (c), of the Qualification Directive, the Minister shall determine, on the basis of available country information, whether this conflict leads to indiscriminate violence and, if there is indiscriminate violence, on what scale this indiscriminate violence occurs.

In assessing the intensity of the indiscriminate violence, at least the following elements shall be weighed globally and in conjunction with one another:

Other (significant) indicators pointing to the fact that indiscriminate violence as a result of the armed conflict results in serious and individual threats against civilians may be involved in the assessment of whether there is a real risk of serious harm.

Humanitarian circumstances that are the direct or indirect consequence of the acts and/or omissions of an actor of serious harm who is a party to an armed conflict must be included as a relevant circumstance in this global assessment. Poor humanitarian circumstances resulting from the climate and natural phenomena, such as drought and floods, are not relevant in this context.

The Minister may, in his assessment, establish gradations of arbitrary violence:

Apart from these gradations, a situation exists in which no assessment within the meaning of Article 15, opening words and under (c), of the Qualification Directive takes place, because there is no armed conflict or there is no indiscriminate violence as a result of an armed conflict. In that case, the foreign national cannot, for that reason alone, qualify for a residence permit as referred to in Article 29a, paragraph 1, of the Aliens Act (Vreemdelingenwet).

There is an exceptional degree of indiscriminate violence if the overall situation of violence in the context of an international or internal armed conflict in the country of origin or in a specific area of this country is such that it is assumed that a foreign national, solely by virtue of his presence in that territory, faces a real risk of a serious and individual threat to his life or person. The requirement of individualisation of the foreign national is limited in these cases to originating from the country or specific area where such an exceptional degree of indiscriminate violence exists.

If there is a relatively higher level or a relatively lower level of arbitrary violence, then the mere presence of the foreign national in the area concerned is in itself no longer sufficient to assume a real risk of serious harm.

In that case, the foreign national must demonstrate, on the basis of his individual situation and personal circumstances, that:

These circumstances may relate in particular to private, professional or family life. This does not, however, mean that the presence of risk-increasing factors alone makes a real risk of serious harm plausible.

As the level of indiscriminate violence is lower, relatively more significant individual circumstances will be required to assume a real risk. At a relatively lower level of indiscriminate violence, the risk-increasing circumstances put forward by the foreign national will therefore have to carry more weight in order to be able to assume a real risk.

After a foreign national has presented his personal characteristics and individual circumstances and, where necessary, has made them plausible, the IND shall assess those circumstances in light of the security situation in the area from which the foreign national originates.

This means that only after the foreign national has put forward the relevant elements relating to the individual situation and the general situation in the country of origin, shall the IND determine that the risk may fall under Article 15, opening words and subparagraph (c), of the Qualification Regulation.

In this regard, the IND shall make a reasoned assessment and consider whether the foreign national has demonstrated that it is plausible that the relevant elements actually result in an increased risk of serious harm and that, as a result of these circumstances, the foreign national in particular runs a real risk of becoming a victim of indiscriminate violence.

In assessing the risk upon return, the IND may, depending on the individual case, take into account whether the foreign national can avoid harm upon return.

The gradations outlined above are intended solely as an indicative tool for the IND. These gradations indicate in broad terms how the situation of indiscriminate violence in a (part of a) country of origin is assessed. The policy-based determination of the gradation of violence for the various countries thus aims to ensure that the IND incorporates the level of violence prevailing in a country into the assessment in a uniform manner. In that assessment, however, the individual circumstances put forward by the foreign national are paramount to the question of whether it has been made plausible that those circumstances increase the risk of becoming a victim of indiscriminate violence.

In addition, the IND must take into account that the foreign national had already experienced violence prior to his departure from his country (see also Article 4, paragraph 4, of the Qualification Regulation). In this regard, it is irrelevant whether the previously experienced violence was the result of indiscriminate violence or of targeted violence. In this context, the IND assesses whether the previously experienced violence, in combination with the individual situation and personal circumstances of a foreign national and in light of the security situation, can lead to an increased risk of indiscriminate violence.

In the country-specific policy in Chapter C10 Vc, it can be determined whether one of the gradations is applicable in the country or area concerned.

Article 7 of the Qualification Regulation describes what is understood by actors of protection. The IND shall not grant an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29 or 29a of the Aliens Act (Vreemdelingenwet), if actors of protection are able and willing to offer protection to the foreign national.

The IND assumes that protection of the foreign national by the authorities in the country of origin as referred to in Article 7, paragraph 1, opening words and under a, of the Qualification Regulation is not possible, if the threat to the foreign national originates from the authorities in the country of origin. There are two exceptions to this main rule:

In both exceptional situations, the IND finds that protection of the foreign national by the authorities in the country of origin is possible.

The IND considers in any event the following organisations as stable, established non-governmental organisations, including international organisations within the meaning of Article 7, paragraph 1, opening words and under (b), of the Qualification Regulation:

The IND considers the protection of the foreign national as referred to in Article 7, paragraph 1, of the Qualification Regulation to be in any case of a non-temporary nature, if there are no concrete indications that the effective protection of the foreign national against persecution or serious harm by the authorities and/or stable, established non-state actors will end within the foreseeable future.

Article 7, paragraph 2, of the Qualification Regulation indicates that actors of protection must take reasonable measures to prevent persecution or the suffering of serious harm. The actor of protection is not required to provide a full and conclusive guarantee against the threat of persecution or serious harm. The foreign national must have access to this protection.

The IND first investigates whether protection is possible in general. In doing so, the IND makes use of general information from objective sources regarding the country of origin (see also Article 7, paragraphs 2 and 3, of the Qualification Regulation).

If the IND has determined that protection is possible, it is subsequently for the foreign national to render it plausible that a petition for protection to the actors of protection in his individual case must be deemed futile in advance or even dangerous. If the foreign national does not render the latter plausible, only the unsuccessful invocation of protection by him can lead to the conclusion that it has been rendered plausible that those authorities are not willing or able to provide protection.

The IND shall, in assessing whether the actors of protection in the country of origin are able and willing to provide effective protection, involve in any event:

Article 8 of the Qualification Regulation governs what is understood by an internal protection alternative.

The IND shall not grant an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29 or 29a of the Vw if the IND concludes that an internal protection alternative as referred to in Article 8, paragraph 1, of the Qualification Regulation is available to the foreign national.

Pursuant to Article 8, paragraph 3, of the Qualification Regulation, the IND only proceeds to the question of whether there is an internal protection alternative once it has been established that there is a well-founded fear of persecution or a real risk of serious harm. In that case, the IND must investigate and demonstrate that a foreign national does not require international protection due to the existence of an internal protection alternative. In principle, an internal protection alternative is not deemed to exist if the state or state officials are the actors of persecution or serious harm. An exception to this may be made if it is clearly established that the authority of the actor concerned is clearly limited to a specific geographical area or when the state itself only has control over certain parts of the country.

If the IND reaches the conclusion that an internal protection alternative is available, the foreign national shall be given the opportunity to submit evidence and elements demonstrating that the internal protection alternative is not available to him. If the foreign national has not been questioned on this matter during the interview and has not been given the opportunity to provide evidence thereof, the foreign national must still be offered that opportunity. The IND shall take into account the evidence and elements submitted by the foreign national when deciding on the petition (application) for international protection.

In the investigation into the existence of an internal protection alternative, the IND assesses whether the foreign national can settle in a part of the country other than where he fears persecution or runs a real risk of serious harm.

In addition to the requirement that the threat must not exist in another part of the country, it is also of importance that the foreign national will not encounter a new threat in the other part of the country. If it is plausible that the foreign national also has reason to fear persecution or acts as referred to in Article 29 or 29a of the Vw in the other area, the IND shall assess whether the foreign national can invoke protection against the threat in that area (see paragraph C3/3.4.1 Vc).

It follows from Article 8, paragraph 1, of the Qualification Directive that the foreign national must be able to travel in a safe and lawful manner to and gain access to the territory where he is deemed to be able to invoke internal protection.

The protection afforded to the foreign national within the territory does not have to be the same as the protection the foreign national would have received in the Netherlands.

In assessing the existence of an internal protection alternative, the IND shall in any event take into account:

The fact that the circumstances in the area are less favourable than in the alien's original area of residence is an insufficient reason for the IND not to raise an internal protection alternative.

The IND assesses, having regard to Article 8, paragraph 4 of the Qualification Directive, on the basis of accurate and up-to-date information available from relevant sources concerning the country of origin, whether an internal protection alternative is present in the individual case of the foreign national.

In the country-specific asylum policy, the Minister may, on the basis of available accurate and up-to-date information from relevant sources and with due observance of the stated conditions, determine in advance or exclude the existence of an internal protection alternative.

The IND shall, in principle, not grant an asylum residence permit on the basis of Article 29 or 29a of the Aliens Act (Vreemdelingenwet) if there are concrete indications that the foreign national has returned to the country of origin after submitting his petition for international protection.