Abstract

In the N.A. case, the European Court of Human Rights provides a significant review of the domestic decision-making process in international-protection claims. The risk assessment upon return in the Country of origin of the asylum seekers fails if it is not based on a cumulative approach on all the individual factors which might give rise to a real risk of being persecuted. One can observe how the Court, throughout the non-refoulement principle and threshold set for Article 3, has developed a supranational pattern of risk assessment of being subjected to a treatment contrary to the Convention, very close to that of the European legal framework, that domestic courts should therefore include in their decision-making process in order to avoid a violation of the Convention.