- 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. Individuals targeted by Boko Haram
- 2.2. (Perceived) Boko Haram members or supporters
- 2.3. Members of separatist movements and individuals perceived as supporting them
- 2.4. Members of militant groups in the Niger Delta and individuals perceived as supporting them
- 2.5. Members and perceived supporters of political parties
- 2.6. Individuals involved in and affected by conflicts between herders and farmers
- 2.7. Human rights activists, bloggers, journalists and other media workers
- 2.8. Christian and Muslim minorities in specific areas
- 2.9. Individuals accused of witchcraft
- 2.10. Individuals with albinism
- 2.11. Individuals fearing ritual killing
- 2.12. Individuals refusing chieftaincy titles
- 2.13. Individuals targeted by student cults
- 2.14. LGBTIQ persons
- 2.15. Victims of human trafficking, including forced prostitution
- 2.16. Women and girls
- 2.17. Children
- 2.18. Persons with disabilities or severe medical issues, including mental health issues
- 2.19. Individuals accused of crimes in Nigeria
-
3. Subsidiary protection
- 3.1. Article 15(a) QD
- 3.2. Article 15(b) QD
-
3.3. Article 15(c) QD
- Preliminary remarks
- 3.3.1. Armed conflict (international or internal)
- 3.3.2. Qualification of a person as a ‘civilian’
- 3.3.3. Indiscriminate violence
- 3.3.4. Serious and individual threat
- 3.3.5. Qualification of the harm as ‘threat to (a civilian’s) life or person
- 3.3.6. Nexus/’by reason of’
- 4. Actors of protection
- 5. Internal protection alternative
- 6. Exclusion
- Abbreviations and glossary
- Country of origin information references
- Relevant case law
The next sections provide detailed information and assessment with regard to the criterion of indiscriminate violence in a situation of armed conflict and the risk it represents for civilians in Nigeria. The map below summarises and illustrates the assessment of indiscriminate violence per state.
Figure 12. Assessment of indiscriminate violence in Nigeria (based on information as of April 2021).
|
|
Mere presence would be considered sufficient in order to establish a real risk of serious harm under Article 15(c) QD.
|
||
|
|
Indiscriminate violence reaches a high level and a lower level of individual elements is required to establish a real risk of serious harm under Article 15(c) QD.
|
||
|
|
Indiscriminate violence is taking place, however not at a high level, and a higher level of individual elements is required to establish a real risk of serious harm under Article 15(c) QD.
|
||
|
|
In general, there is no real risk for a civilian to be personally affected within the meaning of Article 15(c) QD
|
It should be noted that there are no states in Nigeria where the degree of indiscriminate violence reaches such a high level that substantial grounds are shown for believing that a civilian, returned to the relevant country or, as the case may be, to the relevant region, would, solely on account of their presence on the territory of that country or region, face a real risk of being subject to the serious threat referred to in Article 15(c) QD.
 |
|
The analysis is structured in alphabetical order: |