Please cite as: EUAA, 'Internal protection alternative' in Country Guidance: Somalia, May 2022.
GUIDANCE NOTE
Last updated: June 2022
The required elements in order to apply Article 8 QD are:
Figure 5. IPA: elements of the assessment.
In relation to these elements, when assessing the applicability of IPA, the case officer should consider the general situation in the respective part of Somalia, as well as the individual circumstances of the applicant. The burden of proof lies with the determining authority, while the applicant remains under an obligation to cooperate. The applicant is also entitled to submit elements and indicate specific reasons why IPA should not be applied to them. Those elements have to be assessed by the determining authority.
Part of the country
GUIDANCE NOTE
Last updated: June 2022
The first step in the analysis of IPA is to identify a particular part of the country with regard to which the criteria of Article 8 QD would be examined in the individual case.
The examples of Mogadishu, Garowe and Hargeisa have been selected as the main urban centres in Somalia, including Puntland and Somaliland.
When identifying the relevant part of the country to assess as IPA, the clan affiliation of the applicant would be an important consideration. For example, for applicants from the Darood/Harti clan family, Garowe may be particularly relevant to assess. Similarly, Hargeisa may be particularly relevant to assess for applicants originating from Somaliland and/or belonging to the Isaaq clan family. For applicants from other clans, Mogadishu may be more relevant to assess, due to the presence of multiple clans in the city.
Safety
GUIDANCE NOTE
Last updated: June 2022
The criterion of safety would be satisfied where there is no well-founded fear of persecution or real risk of serious harm, or where protection is available.
Figure 6. IPA: Assessment of the safety requirement.
Absence of persecution or serious harm
GUIDANCE NOTE
Last updated: June 2022
The assessment should take into account:
- general security situation in relation to indiscriminate violence
The general security situation in the particular part of the country that is being examined as an alternative for internal protection in the individual case should be assessed in accordance with the analysis under the section on Article 15(c) QD.
The conclusions with regard to the three cities of Mogadishu, Garowe and Hargeisa are as follows:
In Mogadishu: indiscriminate violence reaches a high level, and, accordingly, a lower level of individual elements is required to show substantial grounds for believing that a civilian, returned to the territory, would face a real risk of serious harm within the meaning of Article 15(c) QD
In Garowe: there is, in general, no real risk for a civilian to be personally affected within the meaning of Article 15(c) QD
In Hargeisa: there is, in general, no real risk for a civilian to be personally affected within the meaning of Article 15(c) QD.
- actor of persecution or serious harm and their reach
In case where the person fears persecution or serious harm by State actors (e.g. journalists), there is a presumption that IPA would not be available (Recital 27 QD).
In specific cases, where the reach of a certain State actor is clearly limited to a particular geographical area (e.g. FMS authorities, Somaliland authorities), the criterion of safety may be satisfied with regard to other parts of Somalia.
In case of persecution by Al-Shabaab, the criterion of safety, in general, would not be satisfied in South-Central Somalia. With regard to Puntland and Somaliland, IPA may be considered safe, depending on individual circumstances. Among other relevant factors, the capacity of Al-Shabaab to track and target individuals in areas outside of its control, the way the applicant is perceived by Al-Shabaab, and whether a personal enmity is at stake should be given due consideration.
With regard to other actors of persecution or serious harm, such as ISS and clans, their presence is generally geographically more limited. In some cases, the criterion of safety under IPA could be satisfied, depending on individual circumstances.
Where the applicant faces persecution or serious harm for reasons related to the prevalent social norms in Somalia and the actor of persecution or serious harm is the Somali society at large (e.g. LGBTIQ persons), IPA would in general not be considered safe.
For certain particularly vulnerable individuals, such as some women and children, if the actor of persecution or serious harm is the (extended) family or clan (e.g. FGM, forced marriage), taking into account the reach of these actors, the lack of State protection and their vulnerability to potential other forms of persecution or serious harm, IPA would in general not meet the requirement of safety.
See the section Actors of persecution or serious harm.
- whether the profile of the applicant is considered a priority target by the actor of persecution or serious harm
The profile of the applicant could make them a priority target, increasing the likelihood that the actor of persecution or serious harm would attempt to trace them in the potential IPA location.
- behaviour of the applicant
It cannot be reasonably expected that the applicant abstains from practices fundamental to his or her identity, such as those related to their religion or sexual orientation and gender identity, in order to avoid the risk of persecution or serious harm.
- other risk-enhancing circumstances
The information under the section 2. Refugee status should be used to assist in this assessment.
Availability of protection against persecution or serious harm
GUIDANCE NOTE
Last updated: June 2022
Alternatively, it may be determined that the requirement of safety is satisfied if the applicant would have access to protection against persecution or serious harm, as defined in Article 7 QD, in the area where IPA is considered. In the case of persecution by the State, a presumption of non-availability of State protection applies.
In relation to Mogadishu, the requirement of safety may be satisfied only in exceptional cases. Individual circumstances are to be taken into consideration.
In relation to Garowe and Hargeisa, the requirement of safety may be satisfied, depending on the profile and the individual circumstances of the applicant.
Travel and admittance
GUIDANCE NOTE
Last updated: June 2022
In case the criterion of ‘safety’ is satisfied, as a next step, case officers have to establish whether an applicant can:
Figure 7. Travel and admittance as requirements for IPA.
It should be noted that in the context of Somalia, the three requirements should be read in conjunction.
The individual circumstances of the applicant should also be taken into account when assessing whether he or she can safely and legally travel and gain admittance to a part of the country.
For those applicants who meet the ‘safety’ criterion, the assessment of the availability of IPA should proceed with an assessment of the requirements of safety and legality of travel and of gaining admittance.
Based on available COI, it is concluded that there are some security concerns with regard to the safety of travel to Mogadishu. With regard to Garowe and Hargeisa, it is concluded that, in general, a person can access these cities without serious risks.
The possession of identification documents may be required to pass through checkpoints to travel to Mogadishu, Garowe and Hargeisa.
Identification documents issued by Somaliland authorities or a travel document such as a visa are required to travel to Hargeisa. The possession of a 30-day visa would not be sufficient to consider that the applicant can settle in the city. The profile and individual circumstances of the applicant should be taken into account.
Clan affiliation does not constitute a legal requirement to travel and gain admittance in Mogadishu, Garowe and Hargeisa, however it would be a crucial factor to take into account when examining the requirements of reasonableness to settle in one of these cities.
Reasonableness to settle
GUIDANCE NOTE
Last updated: June 2022
According to Article 8 QD, IPA can only apply if the applicant ‘can reasonably be expected to settle’ in the proposed area of internal protection.
In applying the reasonableness test, it should be established that the basic needs of the applicant would be satisfied, such as food, shelter and hygiene. Additionally, due consideration has to be given to the opportunity for the person to ensure their own and their family’s subsistence and to the availability of basic healthcare. The assessment should be based on the general situation in the country and the individual circumstances of the applicant.
Figure 8. IPA: assessment of the reasonableness requirement.
General situation
GUIDANCE NOTE
Last updated: June 2022
The general situation in the area in consideration should be examined in light of the criteria described above, and not in comparison with standards in Europe or other areas in the country of origin.
The general circumstances prevailing in Mogadishu, Garowe and Hargeisa assessed in relation to the factors above entail significant hardship. However, they do not preclude the reasonableness to settle in the cities as such. A careful examination should take place, particularly when assessing the reasonableness of IPA to Mogadishu. The person’s ability to navigate the above circumstances in the three cities will mostly depend on access to clan support and financial means and in individual cases, the reasonableness requirement may be satisfied. The impact of COVID-19 on the economic situation, as well as on the healthcare system, should also be considered.
Individual circumstances
GUIDANCE NOTE
Last updated: June 2022
In addition to the general situation in the area of potential IPA, the assessment whether it is reasonable for the applicant to settle in that part of the country should take into account the individual circumstances of the applicant, such as:
- clan affiliation and support network
- age
- gender
- state of health
- religion
- local knowledge
- social, educational and economic background
- civil documentation
- etc.
The individual considerations could relate to certain vulnerabilities of the applicant as well as to available coping mechanisms, which would have an impact when determining to what extent it would be reasonable for the applicant to settle in a particular area. It should be noted that these factors are not absolute and they would often intersect in the case of the particular applicant, leading to different conclusions on the reasonableness of IPA.
Conclusions on the reasonableness
GUIDANCE NOTE
Last updated: June 2022
The general conclusions on the reasonableness of IPA for particular profiles of applicants are based on an assessment of the general situation in Mogadishu, Garowe and Hargeisa and the individual circumstances of such applicants, as outlined in the sections above.
Mogadishu
Based on the general situation in Mogadishu, and taking into account the applicable individual circumstances, internal protection alternative in Mogadishu may be reasonable only in exceptional cases. Such exceptional cases would in particular include some able-bodied men and married couples without children with no additional vulnerabilities, who belong to locally majority clans and who have educational and professional background facilitating their access to employment, or a support network who is able to assist them in accessing basic subsistence, or those who otherwise have sufficient financial means. In the cases of couples, basic subsistence has to be ensured for both spouses in the IPA location.
Garowe and Hargeisa
In the case of single able-bodied men and married couples without children, IPA could be reasonable for those who belong to the local majority clan and can rely on its support and have no additional vulnerabilities.
In the case of families with children and unaccompanied children, internal protection alternative would in general not be reasonable. Individual circumstances and the best interests of the child should be duly assessed. In the case of applicants from minority groups, including clans who can be considered minorities in the local context of the suggested IPA location, internal protection alternative would in general not be reasonable.
In the case of other profiles, the individual circumstances of the applicant, in particular in relation to clan affiliation, gender, age, the existence of a support/clan network, etc should be given due consideration, when assessing the reasonableness to settle in one of these cities.