M.M., a national of Liberia, entered France as a minor and was provided with refugee status on account of the principle of family unity as his parents were beneficiaries of refugee protection in France. Since 2002, M.M. was sanctioned with a fine or convicted for multiple offences, including illegally wearing a category 6 weapon, illegal transport, possession, offer or cessation of drugs, death threats, driving without a license, violence followed by 8 days of incapacity of a close relative. Finally, he was sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment for rape and violence with use of a weapon against his mother, and he was placed under the obligation to refrain from appearing in any specially designated place and from entering into contact with the victim.

By decision of 24 September 2021, the OFPRA ended international protection for the applicant on the basis of Article L. 511-8 of CESEDA, noting that M.M.’s father was naturalised in France which entailed a change of circumstances no longer supporting the basis of his protection. In addition, the family link between him and his mother had been broken on account of the crimes committed against her and the fact that he had also created his own family in the meantime, so that the basis for the recognition of refugee protection no longer subsisted.

The applicant appealed on 15 December 2021 claiming that his mother still had refugee protection and that on the basis of the principle of family unity he should continue to benefit from that same protection, that he had material and moral links to France and that he still had the same well-founded fears regarding a return to the country of origin.

The CNDA confirmed the decision of the OFPRA which ceased to recognize the person as a refugee on the grounds that the circumstances which justified the recognition of this status have ceased to exist within the meaning of Article 1 C (5) of the Geneva Convention.

The court noted that the fact that M.M.’s father was naturalised in France eliminated the circumstance following which the son was admitted to this status and thus constituted a change in the circumstances which justified the recognition of refugee status pursuant to the principle of family unity, within the meaning of Article 1 C (5) of the Geneva Convention.

The court also held that the crimes committed against his mother have altered family ties so that the principle of family unity can no longer be applied in accordance with its purpose, which also constitutes a reason for cessation within the meaning of Article 1 C (5) of the Geneva Convention and Article L. 511-8 of the CESEDA.

Finally, the court ruled that it is under an obligation to verify ex officio if, considering the file and the hearings, there is scope for maintaining international protection under the Geneva Convention or Article L. 512-1 of the CESEDA for other reasons than the ones for which the person had obtained international protection. On this point, the court noted that M.M. did not bring any evidence that there might be other reasons for him to be provided with protection, nor that the situation in the country of origin precludes his return.

Thus, the court rejected the appeal.