Title	Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston in Case C‑238/19 EZ v Federal Republic of Germany, represented by the Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Hannover (Administrative Court, Hanover, Germany))
Publisher	European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union
Publication Date	28 May 2020
Country	Germany | Syrian Arab Republic
Topics	EU Qualification Directive | Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription | Persecution based on political opinion
Citation / Document Symbol	ECLI:EU:C:2020:404
Cite as	Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston in Case C‑238/19 EZ v Federal Republic of Germany, represented by the Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Hannover (Administrative Court, Hanover, Germany)), ECLI:EU:C:2020:404, European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union, 28 May 2020, available at: https://www.refworld.org/cases,ECJ,5ee8b4194.html [accessed 18 May 2023]
Comments	Article 9(3) of Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted is to be interpreted as meaning that there must always be a causal link between the reasons for persecution in Article 10(1) and the acts of persecution defined in Article 9(1), including in cases where an applicant for international protection seeks to rely on Article 9(2)(e) of that directive. – Where an applicant for asylum seeks to invoke Article 9(2)(e) of Directive 2011/95 as the act of persecution, reliance upon that provision does not automatically establish that the person concerned has a well-founded fear of persecution because he holds a political opinion within the meaning of Article 10(1)(e) thereof. It is for the competent national authorities, acting under the supervision of the courts, to establish whether there is a causal link for the purposes of that directive. In conducting that assessment the following factors may be relevant: whether the applicant’s home country is conducting a war; the nature and methods employed by the military authorities in such a war; the availability of country reports documenting matters such as whether recruitment for military service is by conscription; whether the status of conscientious objector is recognised under national law and, if so, the procedures for establishing such status; the treatment of those subject to conscription who refuse to perform military service; the existence or absence of alternatives to military service; and the applicant’s personal circumstances, including his age.
Disclaimer	This is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of UNHCR, the United Nations or its Member States.