Skip to main content
Migration and Home Affairs


In the context of international protection, principle that it is the duty of the applicant for international protection to substantiate the application and that aspects of the applicant's statements that are not supported by documents or other evidence do not need to be confirmed if the conditions set out in Art. 4(5) of Directive 2011/95/EU (Recast Qualification Directive) are met.


Derived by EMN from Art. 4(5) of Directive 2011/95/EU (Recast Qualification Directive) and EUAA: Practical guide on evidence and risk assessment, 2024.


  • BG: ползване от наличието на съмнение
  • CS: v pochybnostech ve prospěch
  • DE: im Zweifel für den Antragsteller / im Zweifelsfall zugunsten des Antragstellers / in dubio pro reo
  • EL: το ευεργέτημα της αμφιβολίας
  • EN: benefit of the doubt
  • ES: beneficio de la duda
  • ET: kahtluse korral taotleja kasuks
  • FI: benefit of the doubt - periaate
  • FR: bénéfice du doute
  • GA: sochar an amhrais
  • HR: blagodat sumnje
  • HU: kétség esetén a kérelmező javára
  • IT: Beneficio del dubbio
  • LT: abejonės aiškinamos prieglobsčio prašytojo naudai
  • LV: šaubu tulkošana par labu personai
  • MT: Benefiċċju tad-dubbju
  • NL: voordeel van de twijfel
  • PL: wątpliwości przemawiają na korzyść wnioskodawcy
  • PT: benefício da dúvida
  • RO: beneficiul dubiului
  • SK: v pochybnostiach v prospech
  • SL: v dvomu v korist
  • SV: tvivelsmålets fördel
  • NO: tvilens fordel
  • KA: ეჭვის განმცხადებლის სასარგებლოდ გადაწყვეტა
  • UK: перевага сумніву
  • HY: բարենպաստ կարծիք կամ դատողություն, որն ընդունվել է` չնայած անորոշությանը

Broader Term


  1. Art. 4(5) of the Recast Qualification Directive allows the case officer to make a clear decision on whether to accept an asserted material fact as credible even though there may be no other evidence to support the fact if the following conditions are met: (a) the applicant has made a genuine effort to substantiate their application;(b) all relevant elements at the applicant's disposal have been submitted, and a satisfactory explanation has been given regarding any lack of other relevant elements;(c) the applicant's statements are found to be coherent and plausible and do not run counter to available specific and general information relevant to the applicant's case;(d) the applicant has applied for international protection at the earliest possible time, unless the applicant can demonstrate good reasons for not having done so; and (e) the general credibility of the applicant has been established.
    The five criteria of Art. 4(5) of the Recast Qualification Directive are cumulative.
  2. The principle of giving applicants the benefit of the doubt in credibility assessments is essential due to the potential grave risks to an applicant's life and/or integrity if international protection is unjustly denied in such cases. This need and its relevance have been acknowledged by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), emphasizing the frequent necessity of granting applicants the benefit of the doubt in evaluating the credibility of their statements. For more information see e.g. ECtHR, Grand Chamber: Case of J.K. and others v. Sweden (Application No. 59166/12), Judgment of 23 August 2016.
  3. For more information see: EUAA: Practical guide on evidence and risk assessment, 2024, UNHCR: Beyond proof: credibility assessment in EU asylum systems, 2013 and UNCHR: Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees, 2019.