Last updated on July 20th, 2021 at 11:56 am

Concerning Ms. J.D vs Denmark for violation of articles 2, 6, 7, 14, 18, 26 and 27 of CCPR.

The author is subject to religious persecution and detention as a member of Falun Gong (a religion which is illegal in China). She was imprisoned several times and then at a mental hospital until 2007. During the detention she was abused in several ways including beating in the head by a hammer and rape. She was also subject to forced medication. Thus she fled China illegally and entered Denmark. 

Her asylum application was rejected, and the Refugee Board argues that since the last detention in 2007 and until she left China, she did not suffer from further persecution and thus she is not in risk of persecution on return. Since the author did not practice her religion in public from 2007 until she left China she is thus not a refugee in well founded fear of persecution on return. In other words- the fact that after being detained several times because of her religious belief, the author  decided not to perform her religion in public- is used by the Board to conclude that she is no longer in risk of persecution in China.The Committee decided on the 26 October 2016 that a deportation of the author would not violate article 7 and 18 of the CCPR. The rest of the communication was declared inadmissible.