The applicant, a Syrian national, appealed the decision of the Commissioner General for Refugees and Stateless Persons (CGRS) of 22 June 2020 by which the applicant was excluded from international protection on the basis of Article 1 (F) (b) of the Geneva Convention for committing a serious non-political crime. The CGRS relied essentially on the applicant’s statements and also referred to Belgian and Syrian legislation to conclude that the applicant committed rape, when he had forced sexual relations with his wife, while she was thirteen years old, and with whom he was married while she was still a minor.

The Council allowed the appeal and granted refugee status. The Council observed that sexual relations with minors in the context of early or very early marriage may constitute a ground for exclusion, but also pointed out that exclusion is not automatic and that such an analysis must be carried out individually and take into account all relevant factors. Unlike the Commissioner, the Council considered that the applicant’s statements, who on numerous occasions highlighted the importance of religious laws, customs and traditions within his community to justify his marriage in 2011 to his then thirteen year old wife, combined with the general information referred to in the appeal and in particular the Syrian law on personal status, which, under certain conditions, authorises marriage with a 13-year-old girl, enabled the Council reasonably to believe that the applicant was neither aware of the unlawfulness of his act nor of his intention to commit rape. Furthermore, the Council noted that the applicant and his wife, now aged 23, have left Syria together, that the applicant’s wife linked her own application to that of his husband, that they had two children together and that they are waiting for a third one. The Council also noted that the applicant’s wife declared to be happy with her husband and that she invoked the fear that he might be recruited to the army in Syria. The Council also noted that a welfare officer observed the mutual trust and mutual respect between the applicant and his wife, and stressed the involvement of both spouses in the education and schooling of their children, in an equivalent and active manner.

Thus, in the light of all the particular circumstances, the Council considered that not all the elements were present to establish that there were serious reasons to believe that the applicant committed a serious non-political crime by engaging in sexual relations with his thirteen year old wife.

The Council cited the EASO Judicial Analysis on Exclusion — Articles 12 and 17 Qualification Directive, January 2016, and Country Guidance: Syria. Common analysis and guidance note, 2020.