The applicant, a national from Kinsasha, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), applied for international protection in Switzerland on 10 February 2022. He claimed that while living in Ituri Province since 2006, he had been forcibly recruited by Lendu rebels in a gold mine, suffered injuries in a bombing raid, and later feared reprisals from government forces due to his time in militia-controlled areas. He alleged that he could not return to Kinshasa because of stigma linked to his forced militia involvement, nor to eastern DRC because deserters were seen as traitors at risk of re-recruitment. He also cited health conditions, including HIV (stage A2), depression, and disability. He had been evacuated to Uganda before traveling to Türkiye and then Switzerland. His two adult sons had also applied for asylum separately.

The State Secretariat for Migration (SEM) rejected the international protection application on 13 December 2024 and ordered the applicant's removal from Switzerland. The applicant appealed the decision to the Federal Administrative Court on 13 January 2025, requesting recognition of refugee status and provisional admission. In his appeal, he held that he had achieved a certain level of notoriety in the east of the DRC, and that he was a member of the rebel militias by national authorities. He argued that he could not return to Kinsasha where he would be executed due to his past forced labour for militias, and he could not return to the east of the country, because he deserted the rebel militias and he would be considered a traitor and subjected to re-recruitment. He also cited medical conditions including stage A2 HIV, depression, and disability.

In its reasoning, the Federal Administrative Court found that the applicant failed to credibly demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution under Article 3 of the Asylum Act. The court held that his claims regarding his nationwide notoriety and his association with rebel groups lacked credibility and were unsubstantiated. The court also noted that the applicant had been issued a passport by Congolese authorities in 2017, which undermined his claims of state hostility.

Regarding the applicant's claims on his medical condition, the court referred to previous case law stating that return from Switzerland of rejected asylum seekers who suffered from HIV were considered generally reasonable, as long as the infection had not reached stage C. The situation in the country of origin of the person must also be considered. The court cited an EASO Medical COI Report – Democratic Republic of Congo (August 2021), according to which the fight against HIV/AIDS is given high priority in the DRC, and appropriate medications are easily accessible and free of charge. Considering the applicant's individual circumstances, the court stated that HIV in stage A2 does not render removal unreasonable, pointing to several health facilities in Kinsasha where treatment for HIV was available. The applicant's depression and other conditions could also be treated locally.

Finally, the FAC rejected the argument that generalised violence in eastern DRC made return unreasonable, since the applicant originated from Kinshasa, where he still had a family support network and did not face the same risks as in conflict zones.

In conclusion, the Federal Administrative Court dismissed the appeal, upheld the SEM's decision, and confirmed the removal order. It ruled that the applicant did not qualify for refugee status or provisional admission and that removal to the DRC was legally and practically permissible, despite the applicant's medical conditions.