A Togolese national requested international protection in Belgium on 14 December 2022, claiming he feared persecution due to his sexual orientation and rejection from his family members. By decision of 27 March 2024, the Office of the Commissioner General for Refugees and Stateless Persons (CGRS) rejected the applicant's request, finding that he did not provide sufficient evidence to establish a well-founded fear of persecution under the Geneva Refugee Convention, and that there were no serious and substantiated grounds to suggest a real risk of serious harm. The CGRS noted that the applicant's statements concerning the discovery of his homosexuality, and the description of his romantic relationships in Togo lacked details, were imprecise, and did not reflect any personal emotional experience. The CGRS further considered that the applicant's account, regarding how his friend discovered his homosexuality, his subsequent confrontation with his family, and the fear that the imam of the local mosque could instigate his arrest, lacked credibility due to the vague and generic nature of the statements. Moreover, the CGRS stated that the applicant's behaviour was inconsistent with a well-founded fear of persecution, as he waited nearly four years after the alleged discovery of his homosexuality and the related issues with his family before deciding to leave Togo in early 2022. The CGRS then noted that the applicant had the membership cards of the ASBLs La Maison Arc-en-Ciel and Come to Be in Liège, participated in the 2023 summer Gay Pride in Antwerp and in several activities organised by these two associations promoting LGBTIQ rights. However, it recalled that simply associating with organisations defending the rights of homosexual persons and participating in activities organised in this context was not sufficient to restore the credibility of his statements or to prove his sexual orientation. The applicant appealed before the Council for Alien Law Litigation (CALL). 

The CALL observed that the CGRS did not dispute the homophobic context in Togo and conducted a superficial review of the applicant's statements about homosexuality in his country of origin. The CALL first noted that the applicant submitted several information, showing that homosexuality was criminalised in Togo, that Togolese society considered homosexuality as “a behaviour not in line with social order”, and that LGBTIQ people were victims of homophobic violence. It concluded that Togo presented a repressive legal environment and a hostile social climate toward homosexuals. 

The CALL then considered that the various documents in the applicant's file and his statements were coherent and credible concerning his sexual orientation. The CALL found that the applicant was credible regarding his homosexual experience in Belgium regardless of the facts he invoked in Togo. It then noted that the CGRS' investigation into the applicant's romantic relationship in Belgium and into his involvement in various LGBTIQI associations was superficial. The CALL highlighted that the applicant had submitted a testimony dated 20 April 2024 from the individual he identified as his partner, and who state that they met in a gay bar in Belgium in September 2023 and began a relationship a few months later. The applicant also provided multiple attestations and supporting materials demonstrating his involvement in the LGBTIQ community. 

The CALL found that the applicant had been able to provide a sufficiently coherent, plausible, and substantiated account that allowed the conclusion that he was homosexual. It further considered that the applicant's sexual orientation was sufficient to conclude that he would be at risk of persecution if returned to Togo, regardless of the assessment of the credibility of his homosexual experience in the country. 

Consequently, the CALL considered that there was no need to further examine the other grounds of the contested decision, as such an examination could not lead to a different conclusion regarding the fact that the applicant had sufficiently established a well-founded fear of persecution in his country of origin due to his membership in the particular social group of homosexuals, within the meaning of Article 1 of the Geneva Refugee Convention. In light of the above, the CALL granted the applicant refugee status.