Concerning A.A.S. vs. Denmark for violation of CRC. The author was denied asylum by the Immigration Service and the Refugee Appels Board upheld the decision. Thus, it was submitted to the Committee on Rights of the Child on behalf of A.A.S. But while it was pending at the Committee, A.A.S was granted Refugee Status by […]
Concerning A.H.A. et al. vs Denmark for violation of articles 3, 7, 9, 10 and 12 of CRC. Together with their parents, the authors fled Syria in 2015 and travelled to Denmark. The four youngest authors flew with their mother and grandmother, via Turkey and Greece. The other two authors travelled directly to Denmark with their […]
Concerning H.S. vs Denmark The author applied for asylum in Denmark, but her application was rejected. Thus, it was send to CEDAW. While it was pending at the Committee, the State Party decided to grant her residence permit on the 19 February 2018. Therefore, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women decided to […]
The following case is about the deportation of an Iranian refugee family with four children, aged 1-11, to Italy. The authors arrived in Italy in October 2012. Immediately after they were granted asylum, they were evicted from their temporary shelter and forced to live on the streets. They left for Denmark two weeks later. In […]
Concerning A.M.H. vs. Denmark for violation of article 6 and 7 of CCPR. The author got in a conflict with Al-Shabaab, because he refused to join them. That led to Al-Shabaab killing his father and detaining the author. He escaped the prison after three days. The day after the escape, the Al-Shabaab came asking for […]
The Committee decides to discontinue the consideration of communication No. 2497/2014 owing to duplicate registration.
Concerning Mr. A.H.J vs Denmark for violation of article 6 or 7, 13, and 26 of CCPR. The author’s original asylum motive was that he feared being killed by the Taliban if returned to Afghanistan. He had been abducted and detained by three people linked to the Taliban, as the Taliban wanted to train the […]
Concerning N.A.S vs Denmark for violation of articles 2, 12 and 16 of CEDAW. The author was born and raised in Iraq. Her father decided who she will have to marry and she was not told about this. The author met a young man Mr.A (citizen of Denmark) and they fell in love and decided […]
Concerning Ms. M.E.N. vs. Denmark violation of CEDAW article 2 (d), 12 and 15. The applicant was born on 1 July 1988 in Burundi. The author is a Burundian national, an ethnic Hutu and a Protestant. In 2008, she became a member of the party FNL, the opposition party to the government in Burundi, as […]
The applicant fled from Afghanistan to Denmark and applied for asylum. He fled because a commander killed the author’s father, and took the family land. The applicant was rejected by the Refugee Board and thus the case was sent to UNHCR. The Board however decided to reopen the case because of the applicant’s new asylum […]
Concerning Ms. R.G vs Denmark for violation of articles 1, 2 (c) and (d), 3, 12 and 15 of CEDAW. The applicant’s husband worked for Mr. R.K and she was left alone for long periods without any knowledge about his activities. In April 2012, her husband came home and told her to get ready to […]
Concerning Ms. A.O.D. vs. Denmark violation of CEDAW article 2 (d), 12 and 15. The author is a Somali national, born on 27 February 1991. She feared that if she is returned to Somalia, she would be killed by Al-Shabaab and the family of A.A., with whom she had a child outside marriage. When the […]
Concerning Z.S. and M.S. vs. Denmark for violation of articles 6, 7, 13, 14 and 26 of CCPR. Entering Denmark with his younger brother in November 2010, the complainant applied for asylum. The author’s parents fled from Afghanistan to Iran when he was a kid, as a result of an incidence that occurred. The author’s […]
This Communication is a complaint about the deportation of the author to another European Country according to the so-called “Dublin rules”. Since the Danish authorities decided to stop the deportation and allow the asylum application of the author to be processed in Denmark, this Communication was then discontinued.
This Communication is a complaint about the deportation of the author to another European Country according to the so-called “Dublin rules”. Since the Danish authorities decided to stop the deportation and allow the asylum application of the author to be processed in Denmark, this Communication was then discontinued.
This Communication is a complaint about the deportation of the author to another European Country according to the so-called “Dublin rules”. Since the Danish authorities decided to stop the deportation and allow the asylum application of the author to be processed in Denmark, this Communication was then discontinued.
This Communication is a complaint about the deportation of the author to another European Country according to the so-called “Dublin rules”. Since the Danish authorities decided to stop the deportation and allow the asylum application of the author to be processed in Denmark, this Communication was then discontinued.
This Communication is a complaint about the deportation of the author to another European Country according to the so-called “Dublin rules”. Since the Danish authorities decided to stop the deportation and allow the asylum application of the author to be processed in Denmark, this Communication was then discontinued.
Concerning E. A. vs. Denmark for violation of article 6 and 7 of CCPR As a child, E.A.’s father was killed because of his conversion from Sunni to Shia Islam when marrying the applicant’s mother who is a Shia Muslim. Consequently, the rest of his family had to flee Afghanistan to Iran. He then lived […]
The applicant is ethnically a Hazara Shia Muslim, born in Afghanistan. During the Day of Ashoura in 2005, a special Shia religious day, the applicant helped the events by, for example, showing people where to sit in the Mosque. During the event, the Mosque was attacked by Sunni Muslims including a prominent commander. The applicant […]
This Communication is a complaint about the deportation of the author to another European Country according to the so-called “Dublin rules”. Since the Danish authorities decided to stop the deportation and allow the asylum application of the author to be processed in Denmark, this Communication was then discontinued.
This Communication is a complaint about the deportation of the author to another European Country according to the so-called “Dublin rules”. Since the Danish authorities decided to stop the deportation and allow the asylum application of the author to be processed in Denmark, this Communication was then discontinued.
This Communication is a complaint about the deportation of the author to another European Country according to the so-called “Dublin rules”. Since the Danish authorities decided to stop the deportation and allow the asylum application of the author to be processed in Denmark, this Communication was then discontinued.
Concerning J.H.Z (represented by Helle Holm Thomsen) vs. Denmark. The author was applying for Danish nationality, but due to his disability (suffering from Schizophrenia, post traumatic stress and paranoid psychosis) he was not able to pass a language test. Since he was not able to get dispensation from Danish authorities he complaint to the Human […]
Concerning W vs. Denmark. The author was applying for Danish nationality, but due to his disability (suffering from Post Traumatisk stress) he was not able to pass a language test. Since he was not able to get dispensation from Danish authorities he complaint to the Human Rights Committee in 2011. When new rules were introduced […]
Concerning S.A. vs. Denmark for violation of article 3 of CAT and article 7 of CCPR. When the author applied for asylum in Denmark, she expressed her fear for the return to Ethiopia as she has gone through torture. If returned she would be kidnapped and tortured by the Ethiopian authorities or forced to perform […]
Concerning Z.S. vs. Denmark for violation of article 6 or 7 of CCPR. The complainant is a Tadjik Afghan citizen from Maidan Wardak province. As a child his farther and older brother were killed. Consequently, the rest of his family had to flee Afghanistan. The author has no family or relatives in neither Denmark nor […]
Concerning A. O. vs. Denmark for violation of article 3 of CAT and article 7 of CCPR. The author left Syria as a political prosecutor and has been arrested and subjected to torture by the Syrian authorities due to his Kurdish background. He entered Denmark in 2010. When he applied for asylum in Denmark, he […]
This case concerns an Eritrean man who served in the Eritrean military. In Eritrea the military service is by law set to be 1 ½ years, however after this period he was forced to stay in the army for another 10 years. The applicant attempted to desert, but was arrested and accused of working against […]
Concerning Ms. F.G vs Denmark for violation of articles 2,7,9,10,18 and 27 of CCPR. The author is a citizen of Eritrea and is a member of a religious minority- the Pental Costa movement- a group of christians who refuse to perform military service. In Eritrea her religious conviction is prohibited by the state. The author […]
