Iranian asylum claims and evidence about non-belief · BRS.25.000799
Council of State, Administrative Jurisdiction Division · 24 April 2026
Two applicants challenging Dutch asylum refusals won in the district court. The minister appealed. The question was whether reports about Iran justified treating people who leave a religion or identify as atheists as safe when they tend to express their convictions discreetly.
What was missing from the refusals
The Council of State applied its March 2026 assessment of the country evidence. The available information did not give a sufficiently clear account of the position of apostates and atheists, including people who usually express their beliefs quietly. The minister needed further investigation before dismissing a fear of persecution on that basis.
What happened to the applications
The minister lost the appeal. The district court’s orders annulling both refusals and requiring fresh decisions stood. The Council of State also ordered reimbursement of €934 in appeal legal costs. Neither applicant received refugee status from this judgment. The decisions to be made still had to address their circumstances.
Why the scope matters
The judges did not need to settle the wider question of when an applicant can be expected to exercise restraint. Their narrower finding was decisive: the ministry’s account of the underlying risk was incomplete. For a similar claim, the date and substance of the country material can matter as much as the label given to a belief.
Read the Council of State’s judgment and costs order
More decisions from the Netherlands · Explore the European Case Law Journal · Individual consultation times and fees
