Case C-99/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany) lodged on 2 March 2011 — Federal Republic of Germany v Z
Date: 2011-03-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Germany, freedom of movement, freedom of religious beliefs








C_2011173EN.01000402.xml










11.6.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 173/4





Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany) lodged on 2 March 2011 — Federal Republic of Germany v Z
(Case C-99/11)
2011/C 173/07
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Federal Republic of Germany

Defendant: Z

Other parties: Der Vertreter des Bundesinteresses beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht (The Representative of Federal Interests at the Federal Administrative Court); Der Bundesbeauftragte für Asylangelegenheiten beim Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge (Federal Commissioner for Asylum issues at the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees)

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 9(1)(a) of Directive 2004/83/EC (1) to be interpreted as meaning that not every interference with religious freedom which breaches Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights constitutes an act of persecution within the meaning of Article 9(1)(a) of Directive 2004/83/EC, but that a severe violation of religious freedom as a basic human right arises only if the core area of that religious freedom is adversely affected?










2.


If question 1 is to be answered in the affirmative:






(a)


Is the core area of religious freedom limited to the profession and practice of faith in the areas of the home and neighbourhood, or can there be an act of persecution, within the meaning of Article 9(1)(a) of Directive 2004/83/EC, also in cases where, in the country of origin, the practice of faith in public gives rise to a risk to life or limb or physical freedom and the applicant accordingly abstains from such practice?










(b)


If the core area of religious freedom can also comprise certain religious practices in public:






—


does it suffice in that case, in order for there to be a severe violation of religious freedom, that the applicant feels that such practice of his faith is indispensable in order for him to preserve his religious identity,










—


or is it further necessary that the religious community to which the applicant belongs should regard that religious practice as constituting a central part of its doctrine,










—


or can further restrictions arise as a result of other circumstances, such as the general conditions in the country of origin?


















3.


If Question 1 is to be answered in the affirmative:
Is there a well-founded fear of persecution within the meaning of Article 2(c) of Directive 2004/83/EC if it is established that the applicant will carry out certain religious practices — other than those falling within the core area — after returning to the country of origin, even though they will give rise to a risk to life or limb or physical freedom, or is the applicant to be expected to abstain from engaging in such religious practices in the future?






(1)  Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted (OJ 2004 L 304, p. 12).