Background:

According to the Qualification Directive (2011/95/EU), a third-country national or stateless person shall cease to be a refugee if they voluntarily re-avail themselves of the protection of their country of nationality (Article 11 (1)(a)). Similarly, eligibility for subsidiairy protection can cease when the circumstances that led to its granting ceased to exist or have changed to such a degree that protection is no longer required (Article 16(1)). The UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status clarifies that refugees travelling to their country of nationality may be considered, in certain cases, as re-availing themselves of that country’s protection. Additionally, Article 45(1) of the Directive 2013/32/EU outlines procedures for withdrawing international protection, including informing the persons concerned in writing and allowing them to submit reasons as to why their international protection should not be withdrawn.

Finland’s recent Government Programme aims to withdraw international protection once the need for it ends or if the persons avail themselves of protection in their country of origin during holiday travel. The Finnish Ministry of the Interior is currently drafting legislation to achieve this objective, emphasising the need to explore solutions adopted by other EU countries.  

Respondents:

22 EMN Member and Observer Countries (including BE) provided a public answer to this ad hoc query. 

Findings:

A preliminary analysis of the results of the ad hoc query shows that: 

• Most respondents note that travelling to one’s country of origin, while not explicitly addressed in national regulations or legal provisions related to cessation, is difficult to reconcile with the fear of persecution or a real risk of serious harm. Such travel could be seen as re-availing of protection of the country of origin or that the circumstances which led to the granting of subsidiary protection have ceased to exist, and may result in the termination of an international protection status. FR notes that they may authorise protected individuals to travel to their country of origin exceptionally and briefly for humanitarian reasons, provided they inform the relevant authorities and obtain authorisation. DE treats regular or repeated travel to the country of origin similarly to re-establishment there. IT considers any return, even if brief, relevant for termination unless justified by serious and proven reasons and for strictly necessary periods.
   
• All respondents take a case-by-case approach when evaluating the termination of a protection status due to travelling back to the country of origin. Mere travel back does not automatically result in termination. Factors considered include intention, voluntarism, frequency and duration of stay, different grounds for international protection and individual circumstances. The UNHCR Handbook is also mentioned as a guide for interpreting cessation terms. 
   
• 10 respondents (AT, CY, CZ, EE, DE, EL, LV, LT, LU, NL) specifically indicate on the travel document of beneficiaries of international protection that the country of origin is excluded.

For further details, please read the compilation of answers attached above.