A., a national of Yemen, requested international protection in France, claiming that she feared being exposed to persecution or serious harm by her family and Yemeni society, if returned to her country of origin, because of her membership of the social group of women who have evaded compulsory marriage, and of the social group of non-excised women and divorced women. Her claims were also related to a risk of persecution or serious harm by the Houthi militiamen due to the political opinions attributed to her and her Sunni religious affiliation, without being able to benefit from the effective protection of the internationally recognised authorities, controlling the majority of southern Yemen.
On 7 April 2023, the French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA) rejected her request for refugee protection and granted her subsidiary protection. The applicant appealed this decision before the National Court of Asylum (CNDA).
The CNDA allowed the appeal and ruled that women in Yemen who refuse to submit to forced marriage or those who attempt to escape it by leaving their homes after being forced into marriage constitute a particular social group.
The CNDA examined the conditions prevailing in Yemen for women with regard to matrimonial and family law, noting that the legislation, specifically the Personal Status Code, which is based on Sharia law, discriminates against them and is particularly unfavourable in matters of marriage, divorce, inheritance, and child custody.
The court further looked at several sources of information: a report by the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs published in April 2025, a report by the United States Department of State published on 23 April 2024, a report by UNICEF published in 2017 entitled "Yemen – Regional Study in Child Marriage," and a report by the United Nations Population Fund, "Violence Plagues Women and Girls amid Yemen's Relentless Conflict," published in February 2023.
From these sources, it could be observed that the legislation on marriage does not mention the prohibition of forced marriages or a minimum age for marriage. Furthermore, a woman may enter into a marriage only with the consent of her male guardian. In addition, while an article provides that a marriage is void if one of the spouses has been forced to marry, another article states that for women who have never been married, and who have been classified as ‘virgins’ by that law, their silence is sufficient to signify their consent. Moreover, the law does not require the presence of the bride to seal the marriage contract. According to these sources, early and forced marriages are realities of Yemeni society that have been exacerbated by the conflict. Also, marriages are used as financial mechanisms to combat the prevailing economic insecurity in the country, women have no bargaining power over their own marriage contracts, as the agreement is between the wife’s male guardian and the future spouse. If a young woman protests against a marriage imposed by her family, she risks being ostracised and beaten, in particular by her father, her husband and her in-laws, the risk of violence being higher when the wife is younger and with a low level of education. Women may also be beaten for refusing sexual relations and the husband’s physical and sexual violence against his wife is considered normal and social rules prohibit the victim from complaining about it, as women face obstacles in accessing justice also considering that the criminal code provides that a woman’s testimony is less valuable than that of a man and also allows for the reduction of the punishment imposed on a man who killed a woman in his family for an alleged "disgraceful" act. Finally, one source also showed that women may be charged and imprisoned for adultery.
Thus, the court observed that forced marriage, an instrument of subjugation to men, constitutes a social norm and that the surrounding society in Yemen perceives those who escape it differently, so that such women constitute a particular social group within the meaning of Article 1A (2) of the Geneva Refugee Convention and are therefore at risk of persecution, including domestic and family violence, both physical (including sexual) and psychological.
The court noted that the authorities do not provide effective protection to women in such a situation given the legal context which does not encourage women to report the abuse they suffer, as well as the social and moral obstacles they may face.
In the present case, the court found the facts as claimed by the applicant to be established, that she was of Yemeni nationality but born in Jeddah in Saudi Arabia, that she was forcibly married to a Saudi man who subsequently subjected her to regular violence, that she divorced him, and that she had to live with her parents. It was also established that her father opposed her way of life as a divorced woman who worked and drove, considering it too liberal. He then informed her that he planned to send her to live in Yemen, forcibly married to her cousin, as a third wife. Considering all the details in her account, the court considered her statement detailed and personalised.
Thus, the court concluded that if the applicant were to return to Yemen, she would be at risk of persecution due to her membership in the particular social group of Yemeni women who refuse to submit to forced marriage or who evade it. She was granted refugee protection.