Figure 3. IPA: elements of the assessment.
At the time of writing, it is considered that IPA would not be applicable to any part of Afghanistan.
For profiles who have a well-founded fear of persecution or real risk of serious harm by the Taliban, the safety criterion would not be met, taking into account the territorial control of the group. For individuals with a well-founded fear of persecution or real risk of serious harm related to targeting by other actors, the uncertainty of the current situation and the lack of protection meeting the requirements of Article 7 QD would result in IPA not being safe. In exceptional cases a person may not have a well-founded fear or face a real risk of serious harm after relocating to a particular part of the country. When assessing whether the requirement of safety would be substantiated, the uncertainty of the current situation should be taken into account. In particular, it should be noted that there is no information regarding the Taliban’s potential perception and treatment of individuals who have left Afghanistan and have applied for international protection. Moreover, the risk of indiscriminate violence cannot be reliably assessed at the moment of writing.
It is considered that the Taliban control of the country and its implications affect all criteria within the assessment under Article 8 QD. However, taking into account that the criterion of safety is generally not met, the assessment does not need to proceed with regard to the other two requirements.