CELEX: 62012CN0285
Language: en
Date: 2012-06-07 00:00:00
Title: Case C-285/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (Belgium) lodged on 7 June 2012 — Aboubacar Diakite v Commissaire général aux réfugiés et aux apatrides

4.8.2012   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 235/11
            
         Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (Belgium) lodged on 7 June 2012 — Aboubacar Diakite v Commissaire général aux réfugiés et aux apatrides
   (Case C-285/12)
   2012/C 235/21
   Language of the case: French
   
      Referring court
   
   Conseil d’État
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicant: Aboubacar Diakite
   
      Defendant: Commissaire général aux réfugiés et aux apatrides
   
      Question referred
   
   Must Article 15(c) of 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, (1) be interpreted as meaning that that provision offers protection only in a situation of ‘internal armed conflict’, as interpreted by international humanitarian law and, in particular, by reference to Common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 (for the Amelioration of the Conditions of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, for the Amelioration of the Conditions of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, on the Treatment of Prisoners of War, and on the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, respectively)?
   If the concept of ‘internal armed conflict’ referred to in Article 15(c) of Directive 2004/83 is to be given an interpretation independent of Common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, what, in that case, are the criteria for determining whether such an ‘internal armed conflict’ exists?
   
      (1)  OJ 2004 L 304, p. 12.