30/04/2024, 06:58 EUAA - View Case Law

Admin

Home About Latest Digest Relevant Publications Search Submit

Updates Sources Database New Case

Home / M.A. v Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA)
M.A. v Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA)

We use cookies on Case law's website to support technical Ok, I've read it
features that enhance your user experience.
For more information please consult our Cookie Policy .

https://caselaw.euaa.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=3550 1/5
30/04/2024, 06:58 EUAA - View Case Law

20/07/2023
FR: The CNDA held that Russian nationals who flee
conscription for the war in Ukraine or those who deserted,
may obtain refugee status, as a Russian national called up as
part of this mobilization is likely to commit, directly or
indirectly, war crimes.

Show more info

Abstract  Country of Decision

In a Grand Chamber formation, the CNDA ruled that Russian France
nationals who refuse mobilization for the war in Ukraine should be
granted refugee status based on the recast Qualification Directive.  Court Name
FR: National Court of
The case concerned M.A., a Russian national who claimed Asylum [Cour Nationale
international protection in France, raising as arguments first the fear du Droit d'Asile (CNDA)]
of being persecuted by his father based on religious reasons and
# Case Number
second, the fear of persecution by Russian authorities due to political
No 21068674 R
and conscientious objection reasons, because he did not submit to
the military mobilization within the context of the war of Russian  Date of Decision
forces against Ukraine. 20/07/2023

On 16 November 2021, the Office for Refugees and Stateless Persons Country of Origin
(OFPRA) rejected the request for international protection. Russia

Keywords
Before the CNDA, the applicant argued that as a reservist of the
We use cookies
Armed onofCase
Forces law's website
the Russian to support
Federation, technical twice by
he was summoned EUAA COI Reports
features
thethat enhance
military your user of
commissariat experience.
the city of Orel for 3 October and then 19
For more Military service /
December 2022, as part of theour
information please consult Cookie
partial Policy . decided by decree
mobilization
of President Putin on 21 September 2022 and that he refused to C i ti bj ti
https://caselaw.euaa.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=3550 2/5
30/04/2024, 06:58 EUAA - View Case Law
of President Putin on 21 September 2022, and that he refused to Conscientious objection
support a war of aggression and to participate in the war crimes and
crimes against humanity committed by the Russian military. / Desertion / Draft

evasion / Forced
The CNDA rejected the allegations concerning the fear of persecution
by the applicant’s father. conscription

With regard to the fear of persecution due to the refusal of military Source
mobilization, the CNDA found that several investigations into war CNDA
crimes committed in Ukraine concluded that there were war crimes
committed by the Russian armed forces in the context of the Other
international conflict in Ukraine. The court noted that an independent Source/Information
international commission of inquiry on Ukraine set up by the United CNDA Press Release
Nations Human Rights Council had highlighted in two reports (on 18
October 2022 submitted to the UN General Assembly and on 15
March 2023 submitted to the Human Rights Council) the seriousness
and extent of human rights violations and crimes under international
law (torture, executions of Ukrainian war prisoners, summary
executions of civilians, rape and sexual violence crimes, arbitrary
detention, forced deportation of civilians and especially minors,
destruction of critical infrastructures, deliberate and general attacks
on civilian populations) committed at large scale by the entire Russian
armed forces.

The court also looked at the mobilization decided by the Russian

president on 21 September 2022, noting that it was particularly broad
given the rules governing the reserve in Russia, which does not only
include Russian men who have completed their military service. It
further noted that refusing mobilisation exposed the person to
criminal proceedings, criminal sanctions and other forms of
sanctions. The court noted that the criminal code was amended in
Russia since the mobilization was declared, in order to increase the
We usecriminal responsibility
cookies (e.g. for
on Case law's non-respect
website of an order,
to support abandoning a
technical
military
features unit without
that enhance yourapproval, desertion).
user experience.
For more information please consult our Cookie Policy .
Relying also on the Country of Origin Information Reports of the
https://caselaw.euaa.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=3550 3/5
30/04/2024, 06:58
y g y g p
EUAA - View Case Law

EUAA, The Russian Federation - Military service and The Russian Fede
ration - Political opposition, published on 16 December 2022, the
court found that it was not possible to avoid military service during
partial mobilization by performing alternative civilian service and that
the implementation of the mobilization had numerous irregularities
with regard to the public concerned and the mobilization
procedures. It also noted that partial mobilization still remained in
force even if the Minister of Defense had announced that the
mobilization objective had been reached in 2022. It also noted that
those resisting mobilization are exposed to prosecution and criminal
penalties recently strengthened by Russian law.

The court concluded that a Russian national called up for partial

mobilization in September 2022 must be regarded as being led to
commit, directly or indirectly, war crimes, given the very purpose of
the mobilization, the impossibility of refusing a mobilization order
and taking into account the conditions in which the armed conflict
unfolded, marked by the large-scale commission of war crimes by the
various units of the Russian armed forces, whether in the territories
controlled by Ukraine or in the territories currently under the control
of the Russian authorities.

The court further noted that the applicant has the obligation to
provide all the relevant elements to establish that he is actually
subject to a military obligation and mere membership in the reserve
is not sufficient to demonstrate that he would actually be led to
participate directly or indirectly in the commission of war crimes.

In the specific case of the applicant, the CNDA concluded that the
statements and documents presented to the court did not make it
possible to establish that the applicant had been mobilized in the
We usecontext of the
cookies on war
Caseagainst
law's Ukraine
websiteandto that the applicant
support technical had been
exempted
features from your
that enhance military
userservice in 2013 and had fled his country in
experience.
2019
For more citing family
information and religious
please fears.
consult our Cookie Policy .

https://caselaw.euaa.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=3550 4/5
30/04/2024, 06:58 EUAA - View Case Law

© EUAA 2024 | Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged, Legal | EUAA web | Contact
save otherwise stated.

We use cookies on Case law's website to support technical

features that enhance your user experience.
For more information please consult our Cookie Policy .

https://caselaw.euaa.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=3550 5/5