EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR ASYLUM Examining the applicant’s possibility to find an internal protection alternative may also be relevant when they claim to fear non-state actors of persecution or serious harm. In that sense, the examination will be based on the same elements as for applicants who have a nationality. Related EUAA Publications For information on the topic of national protection by actors of protection and internal protection alternative may be found in EASO, Practical Guide on Qualification for International Protection, April 2018, p. 36 onwards and EASO, May 2021. 6.2. National protection in the case of multiple nationality When the applicant holds more than one nationality and it is accepted that they have a fear of persecution or of serious harm in one of their countries of nationality, you will need to assess whether they can be effectively protected against those feared acts of persecution or serious harm by any of their country(ies) of nationality. If national protection is available in any of the applicant’s countries of nationality, be it the one regarding which the fear or risk is expressed or another one, the fear or risk would not be considered well-founded. This was confirmed by the CJEU in case C‑91/20 (LW). CJEU, 2021, LW ( 89) 33. … an applicant who is a national of more than one third country is considered to be deprived of protection only if he or she cannot or, because of the fear of being persecuted, does not wish to avail himself or herself of the protection of any of those countries. That reading is, moreover, confirmed by Article 4(3)(e) of that directive, under which, among the factors which must be taken into account in the individual assessment of an application for international protection, is the fact that it is reasonable to believe that the applicant could rely on the protection of another country where he or she could assert citizenship. It is important to assess whether the national protection can be considered effective, nontemporary and accessible within the meaning of Article 7(2) QR ( 90). The desire of an applicant not to rely upon the protection of a particular country of nationality is irrelevant. (89) CJEU, judgment of 9 November 2021, LW v Bundesrepublik Deutschland, request for a preliminary ruling, case C‑91/20, EU:C:2021:898, paragraph 33. Summary available in the EUAA Case Law Database. This extract is still relevant for the interpretation of the provisions of the QR and APR, considering that the wording of Article 3(5) and 3(6) QR are identical to that of Article 2(d) and 2(f) QD (recast) and that Article 34(2)(f) APR mirrors the content of Article 4(3)(e) QD (recast). (90) And of Article 7(2) QD (recast). 58