M., a national of Zimbabwe, requested international protection in France, claiming that, if returned to her country of origin, she feared being exposed to persecution or serious harm by the Zimbabwean civil society and law enforcement authorities on account of her sexual orientation. The applicant claimed that as an adolescent she had a relationship with a woman and after being blackmailed by her cousin, she informed her family about her sexual orientation, which led to the funding of her schooling being stopped and being forced to marry a soldier with whom she had two children. She claimed that she started a romantic relationship with a woman and in November 2024, when a man was killed for his homosexuality, she protested with her friends. Clashes took place and she was arrested, subjected to ill-treatment and sexual violence for eight days, she was taken to a hospital and then she left Zimbabwe, fearing for her safety.
On 3 April 2025, the French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA) rejected the request for international protection and the applicant appealed the decision before the National Court of Asylum (CNDA).
The court examined the situation in Zimbabwe for homosexual persons, looking at publicly available sources of information, and in particular the Database of the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA), which showed that homosexual persons in Zimbabwe were victims of widespread discrimination, social and police violence.
The court observed that although sexual relations between women are not criminalised in Zimbabwe, as the Criminal Law Act 2006, Section 73 Sodomy, punishes only relations between men, homosexual women are nevertheless subject to hostility and homophobic acts, for which the authorities are unable to provide protection. Further country of origin information (COI) consulted by the court indicated that homosexual women may be arrested for acts described as ‘indecent' and subjected to police arbitrariness. In addition, the US Department of State indicated in 2023 that the Zimbabwean government had not taken any significant steps to identify, investigate or prosecute agents who may have committed human rights violations. The same report indicated that the regime under the previous president was more homophobic. Still, LGBTIQ people are disproportionately accused of public indecency and disorderly conduct, continue to be victims of homophobic attacks, conversion therapy and are forced into heterosexual marriage. The court further noted that the universal periodic review by the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) showed particular concern about violence against lesbian, bisexual and transgender women, perpetrated by both state and non-state actors.
Further issues identified by the court included the low level of reporting of sexual and gender-based violence for fear of reprisals, and potentially a new law to prohibit the ‘promotion' of the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, as reported by the Human Rights Watch (HRW) reports in 2025.
Thus, the court concluded that homosexual persons in Zimbabwe constitute a particular social group.
On the applicant's case, the court noted the precise and spontaneous statements made at the public hearing, as she recounted, in credible terms, the experiences she had lived in Zimbabwe. In addition, it was also noted that the applicant was in a relationship with a Congolese national recognised as a refugee in France, and she carried out activities within the LGBTIQ association ‘Pridettes Couleures', facts corroborated by a testimony from her partner, photographs and several certificates issued by the association.
Thus, the CNDA provided the applicant refugee protection, as she would be at risk of persecution if returned to Zimbabwe.