The applicant, a national of Ukraine, from the oblast of Chernihiv, requested international protection in France. By decision of 15 September 2021, the OFPRA rejected the request and the applicant appealed before the CNDA. She argued that she would be subjected to persecution by nationalists based on political opinion, real and imputed, in the country of origin, and also on account of the security situation in Ukraine.

The court first noted that the risk of persecution as alleged by the applicant was not proven. The court then examined the situation in the oblast of Chernihiv, where the applicant originated.

The court noted that from 24 February 2022, Russian troops invaded northern Ukraine in the direction of Kyiv, and in particular the Chernihiv oblast and that at the end of March, part of them were forced to reorient themselves towards the East and South-East of the country. The court further observed that the city ​​of Chernihiv was besieged from 24 February 2022 to 4 April 2022, the date on which Ukrainian forces took over control in the area. The court added that according to the article in Le Monde entitled: “War in Ukraine: Chernihiv, the city that resisted the Russians” published on 15 April 2022, during the entire month of March the Russians forces surrounded and bombed this city, causing numerous civilian casualties. The court added that the figures consulted on the ACLED website on 4 November 2022 showed a large number of security incidents during the first phase of the conflict, while the number of security incidents and victims decreased considerably since the summer of 2022, so that the Chernihiv oblast no longer constitutes an active conflict zone. Nevertheless, the court highlighted that according to available information, the elderly have been unable to leave and they find themselves in particularly difficult living conditions, being unable to find new accommodation or access care.

From all these aspects, the CNDA concluded that it was not necessary to consider that the international armed conflict in Ukraine generated, as of the date of this decision, in the Chernihiv Oblast, a situation of indiscriminate violence that would reach such a level that there would be serious and proven grounds to believe that each civilian who returned there would be, by their mere presence in this oblast, at real risk of serious threat against life or person.

The court further held that it was up to the applicants who were nationals from this oblast to provide all elements relating to their personal situation allowing them to believe that they would run a risk for their life or their person within the meaning of the provisions of the CESEDA. 

In this case, the applicant was granted subsidiary protection.