- Introduction
- Guidance note
- Common analysis
- General remarks
- 1. Actors of persecution or serious harm
-
2. Refugee status
- Preliminary remarks
-
Analysis of particular profiles
- 2.1. Persons affiliated with the former Afghan government
- 2.2. Individuals who have worked for foreign military troops or perceived as supporting them
- 2.3. Religious leaders
- 2.4. Persons fearing forced recruitment by armed groups
- 2.5. Educational personnel
- 2.6. Healthcare professionals and humanitarian workers, including individuals working for national and international NGOs
- 2.7. Journalists, media workers and human rights defenders
- 2.8. Children
- 2.9. Women
- 2.10. Individuals perceived to have transgressed moral codes
- 2.11. Individuals perceived as ‘Westernised’
- 2.12. LGBTIQ persons
- 2.13. Persons living with disabilities and persons with severe medical issues
- 2.14. Individuals considered to have committed blasphemy and/or apostasy
- 2.15. Ethnic and religious minorities
- 2.16. Individuals involved in blood feuds and land disputes
- 2.17. Individuals accused of ordinary crimes
- 2.18. Individuals who were born in Iran or Pakistan and/or who lived there for a long period of time
-
3. Subsidiary protection
- 3.1. Article 15(a) QD
- 3.2. Article 15(b) QD
- 3.3. Article 15(c) QD
- 4. Actors of protection
- 5. Internal protection alternative
- 6. Exclusion
- Abbreviations and glossary
- Country of origin information references
- Relevant case law
In the context of Afghanistan, (former) membership in armed groups such as ISKP, the Taliban or Hezb-e Islami, could trigger relevant considerations, in addition to the considerations under Article 12(2)(a) / Article 17(1)(a) QD or Article 12(2)(b) / Article 17(1)(b) QD.
The application of exclusion should be based on an individual assessment of the specific facts in the context of the applicant’s activities within that organisation. The position of the applicant within the organisation would constitute a relevant consideration and a high-ranking position could justify a (rebuttable) presumption of individual responsibility. Nevertheless, it remains necessary to examine all relevant circumstances before an exclusion decision can be made.
Where the available information indicates possible involvement in crimes against peace, war crimes or crimes against humanity, the assessment would need to be made in light of the exclusion grounds under Article 12(2)(a) / Article 17(1)(a) QD.
