A married couple, a man and a woman from Afghanistan, of Shia Muslim faith and Hazara ethnicity, lodged requests for international protection with the competent department of the Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs, Directorate for Immigration, on 6 May 2019 for the woman and her children and nephew and on 10 May for the man. They claimed that they lived close to Pashtouns dwellings, the majority of which were composed of Talibans, and that in 2018 the man was mobilised to defend the Hazara in a conflict, which would make him an enemy of the Talibans in power. They further added that death threats were made against the man by a Pashtun family, for the murder of a member of that family, attributed to their nephew.

By decision of 7 August 2020, the Minister of Immigration and Asylum dismissed the requests and the decision included an order to leave the territory within 30 days.

The applicants appealed the decision before the Administrative tribunal, which rejected the appeal on 22 September 2022.

They filed a second appeal before the Administrative court and argued that their personal situation should be analysed in the light of a new element, namely the coming to power of the Taliban in August 2021 which would significantly affect the risks faced in the country of origin because of their Hazara ethnic origin. They also submitted that the best interests of the children would not be protected in Afghanistan and that women in general, and in particular women of Hazara origin, would constantly be subjected to the oppression of the Taliban.

The Administrative court allowed the appeal.

With regard to the applicants' Hazara ethnicity, the court referred to its previous jurisprudence from February 2023 in which it noted that members of the Hazara ethnic group were indeed the subject of widespread and systematic acts of violence and harassment by the Taliban and the ISKP group, however, it was not apparent from the information submitted to the court that the Hazara were subject to widespread and systematic persecution solely on account of their Shiite ethnicity or of their Muslim faith. The court stated that while some publications referred to a serious risk of genocide for the Hazara in Afghanistan, the situation could not be described as such.

With regard to the situation of women in Afghanistan, the court held that they are currently subjected to the oppression of the Taliban on a daily basis, they are banned from most jobs in the civil service and in many other sectors, violations of the human rights of women and girls have gradually worsened since the Taliban came to power in August 2021, characterised by a regression of their civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights and illustrated by the abolition of the right of girls to access secondary education, the compulsory wearing of hijab in public and the prohibition for women to travel without being accompanied by a man from their immediate family.

With regard to the concrete situation and the experience of the applicants, the court held that they credibly stated that the man was involved in the conflict between Pashtouns and Talibans shortly before their departure from Afghanistan. From all these factors, in view of the man having openly opposed the Taliban, combined with the gender of the woman and her two minor daughters the court concluded that there was not just a mere possibility of persecution in their case, insufficient as such to justify their claim, but a reasonable and serious fear of being subjected to acts of persecution, so that it cannot reasonably be held that there was no risk of future persecution for the spouses in the event of returning to Afghanistan. The court granted refugee protection.