Exclusion considerations could be relevant to this profile.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: For judges, prosecutors and female former judicial personnel working under the former government, well-founded fear of persecution would in general be substantiated.

For others under this profile, the individual assessment should take into account the institution they were employed by and their role and functions. Gender and possible personal enmities may also constitute risk-impacting circumstances.

Family members may also have a well-founded fear of persecution, for example in the context of the Taliban searching for the individual they are related to.

Potential nexus: (imputed) political opinion and in some cases, religion (e.g. former female judges).

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: Well-founded fear of persecution would in general be substantiated.

Family members may also have a well-founded fear of persecution.

Potential nexus: (imputed) political opinion.

Exclusion considerations could be relevant to this profile.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: Well-founded fear of persecution would in general be substantiated.

The individual assessment whether the applicant would be perceived to have such affiliation could take into account their place of origin and ethnic background, with Tajiks from Panjshir and Andarab District (Baghlan Province), being particularly at risk.

Potential nexus: (imputed) political opinion.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis:  Well-founded fear of persecution would in general be substantiated.

The individual assessment whether the applicant would be perceived to have such affiliation could take into account their religious affiliation (especially the Salafi community, province of origin (especially Nangarhar and Kunar), as well as additional individual elements implicating the applicant as being supportive of ISKP.

Potential nexus: (imputed) political opinion or (imputed) religious beliefs.

Exclusion considerations could be relevant to this profile.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: The likelihood of being approached for forced recruitment by the Taliban or ISKP is generally low. Risk-impacting circumstances could include:

• age and gender (young men)
• area of origin (in relation to potential ISKP recruitment)
• military background

Potential nexus: (imputed) political opinion and/or religion.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: For human rights defenders and activists well-founded fear of persecution would in general be substantiated.

For others who may be perceived as critical of the Taliban (e.g. due to statements or content shared on social media), the individual assessment should take into account:

• visibility of the applicant
• sensitivity of the topic of criticism
• extent of its public nature

Other risk-impacting circumstances, such as gender and ethnicity, may also be relevant to the assessment.

Family members of individuals under this profile may also have a well-founded fear persecution. Family members of female activists may be at a particular risk.

Potential nexus: (imputed) political opinion and/or religion.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: For journalists and media workers seen by the Taliban as critical of them or as not complying with conditions set by the Taliban well-founded fear of persecution would in general be substantiated.

For other journalists and media workers, risk-impacting circumstances could include:

• gender (i.e. women)
• origin from areas where ISKP have operational capacity
• personal enmities
• etc.

Potential nexus: (imputed) political opinion and/or religion.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis:  The individual assessment of whether there is a reasonable degree of likelihood for the applicant to face persecution should take into account risk-impacting circumstances, such as:

• gender (i.e. female teachers)
• origin from areas where ISKP has operational capacity
• the individual or the institution not following Taliban directives and/or curriculum
• speaking out against the Taliban
• etc.

Potential nexus: (imputed) political opinion and/or religion.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: The individual assessment of whether there is a reasonable degree of likelihood for the applicant to face persecution should take into account risk-impacting circumstances, such as:

• gender (i.e. women)
• nature of activities (e.g. activities for national/international NGO related to polio vaccination, demining, or other activities being perceived as non-neutral or in violation of cultural or religious norms)
• link with the former government or foreign donors
• speaking out or acting against the Taliban or another armed group
• origin from areas where ISKP have operational capacity
• etc.

Potential nexus: (imputed) political opinion and/or religion.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: Well-founded fear of persecution would in general be substantiated.

Potential nexus: religion.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: For individuals perceived to have committed zina well-founded fear of persecution would in general be substantiated.

For other individuals perceived to have transgressed moral and/or societal norms in Afghanistan or abroad, risk-impacting circumstances could include:

• gender (the risk is higher for women)
• profession (especially artists, barbers)
• area of origin and conservative environment
• visibility of the applicant and the transgression (also when the transgression took place abroad)
• etc.

Potential nexus: religion and/or (imputed) political opinion or membership of a particular social group.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: The individual assessment of whether there is a reasonable degree of likelihood for the applicant to face persecution should take into account risk-impacting circumstances, such as:

• behaviour adopted by the applicant
• visibility of the applicant
• area of origin and conservative environment
• gender (the risk is higher for women)
• age (it may be difficult for children of certain age to (re-)adjust to Afghanistan’s social restrictions)
• duration of stay in a western country
• etc.

Potential nexus: religion and/or (imputed) political opinion or membership of a particular social group.

This profile may largely overlap with the profile 3.12 Individuals perceived to have transgressed religious, moral and/or societal norms, for example in relation to norms associated with dress code.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: The individual assessment of whether there is a reasonable degree of likelihood for a Hazara and/or Shia applicant to face persecution should take into account their area of origin and whether ISKP has operational capacity there, with those from Hazara-dominated areas in larger cities being particularly at risk.

Being a Hazara may also be a risk-enhancing circumstance in relation to other profiles.

Potential nexus: religion, (imputed) political opinion (e.g. links to the former government, perceived support for Iran), and/or race (ethnicity).

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: Well-founded fear of persecution would in general be substantiated.

Potential nexus: religion.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: The individual assessment of whether there is a reasonable degree of likelihood for the applicant to face persecution should take into account risk-impacting circumstances, such as:

• province of origin (especially Nangarhar and Kunar)
• additional individual elements implicating the applicant as being supportive of ISKP
• etc.  

Potential nexus: (imputed) political opinion or (imputed) religious beliefs.

For those with links to ISKP, exclusion considerations could be relevant.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: The individual assessment of whether there is a reasonable degree of likelihood for the applicant to face persecution should take into account whether they would be perceived as having an affiliation to NRF, with Tajiks from Panjshir and Andarab District (Baghlan Province), being particularly at risk.

Potential nexus: (imputed) political opinion.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: The accumulation of various measures introduced by the Taliban, which affect the rights and freedoms of women and girls in Afghanistan, amounts to persecution. Such measures affect their access to healthcare, work, freedom of movement, freedom of expression, girls' right to education, among others. Some women and girls in Afghanistan may also face other forms of ill-treatment amounting to persecution (e.g. forced marriage, such as child marriage, honour-based violence).

For women and girls in Afghanistan, well-founded fear of persecution would in general be substantiated.

Links to persecution under other profiles may also be relevant, in particular 3.2. Public officials and servants of the former government, 3.8 Journalists and media workers, 3.10 Humanitarian workers, 3.12 Individuals perceived to have transgressed religious, moral and/or societal norms, and 3.13 Individuals perceived as ‘Westernised’.

Potential nexus: religion and/or other grounds, e.g. membership of a particular social group, (imputed) political opinion1.

Read more in the common analysis

3.16.1. Violence against children

GUIDANCE NOTE
Last update: January 2023

Risk analysis: The individual assessment of whether there is a reasonable degree of likelihood for the child to face violence amounting to persecution should take into account risk-impacting circumstances, such as:

• poor socio-economic situation of the child and the family
• gender (boys and girls may face different risks)
• age and appearance (e.g. non-bearded boys could be targeted as bacha bazi)
• perception of traditional gender roles in the family
• etc.

Potential nexus: The individual circumstances of the applicant need to be taken into account. For example, in the case of (former) bacha bazi children, persecution may be for reasons of membership of a particular social group.

Read more in the common analysis

3.16.2. Child recruitment

GUIDANCE NOTE
Last update: January 2023

Risk analysis: The individual assessment of whether there is a reasonable degree of likelihood for the child to face persecution in the form of child recruitment should take into account risk-impacting circumstances, such as:

• gender
• poor socio-economic situation
• area of origin or residence
• etc.

Potential nexus: The individual circumstances of the child need to be taken into account. For example, in the case of children who refuse to join the Taliban or ISKP, persecution may be for reasons of (imputed) political opinion and/or religion.

Read more in the common analysis

3.16.3. Child labour and child trafficking

GUIDANCE NOTE
Last update: January 2023

Risk analysis: The individual assessment of whether there is a reasonable degree of likelihood for the child to face persecution in the form of child trafficking and/or child labour should take into account risk-impacting circumstances, such as:

• age
• gender
• socio-economic status of the child and their family
• family status
• etc.

Potential nexus: The individual circumstances of the child need to be taken into account to determine whether a nexus to a reason for persecution can be substantiated.

Read more in the common analysis

3.16.4. Children without a support network in Afghanistan

GUIDANCE NOTE
Last update: January 2023

Risk analysis: The lack of a support network does not amount to persecution in itself. However, it considerably enhances the risk for such children to be exposed to acts, which, due to their severity, repetitiveness or accumulation could amount to persecution. See, for example, 3.16.3 Child labour and child trafficking.

Potential nexus: The individual circumstances of the child should be taken into account.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: Well-founded fear of persecution would in general be substantiated.

Potential nexus: membership of a particular social group.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: For men directly involved in a blood feud, well-founded fear of persecution would in general be substantiated.

For women, children and men who are farther removed from the feud, risk-impacting circumstances could include:

• intensity of the blood feud
• origin from areas where the rule of law is weak
• etc.

Potential nexus: The individual circumstances of the applicant need to be taken into account. For example, family members involved in a blood feud may have a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of membership of a particular social group.

Exclusion considerations could be relevant to this profile.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: The individual assessment of whether there is a reasonable degree of likelihood for the applicant to face persecution should take into account risk-impacting circumstances, such as:

• violent nature of the dispute
• ethnicity
• power and influence of the actors involved in the land dispute
• area of origin
• etc.

Potential nexus: In general, no nexus to a Convention reason. This is without prejudice to individual cases where nexus could be established based on additional circumstances (e.g. ethnicity in relation to Taliban taking sides based on the ethnic origin of the person, land dispute leading to a blood feud, etc.).

Exclusion considerations could be relevant to this profile.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: The lack of personnel and adequate infrastructure to appropriately address the needs of individuals with (severe) medical issues fails to meet the requirement of Article 6 QD regarding the existence of an actor that inflicts persecution or serious harm, unless the individual is intentionally deprived of healthcare.

The actor requirement may be satisfied in specific cases of denial of healthcare, such as in the case of women denied access to healthcare due to not being accompanied by a mahram, not wearing a hijab, or not being allowed to be seen by a male healthcare professional. See 3.15. Women and girls.

For persons living with mental and physical disabilities, the individual assessment whether discrimination and mistreatment by society and/or by the family could amount to persecution should take into account the severity and/or repetitiveness of the acts or whether they occur as an accumulation of various measures. Risk-impacting circumstances could include:

• nature and visibility of the mental or physical disability
• negative perception by the family
• etc.

Potential nexus: membership of a particular social group, in the case of persons living with noticeable mental or physical disabilities.

With regard to women, see 3.15. Women and girls.

Read more in the common analysis

Risk analysis: In general, the treatment faced by individuals under this profile would not amount to persecution.

Potential nexus: In general, no nexus to a Convention ground. This is without prejudice to individual cases where nexus could be established based on additional circumstances.

Read more in the common analysis