S.M.F. and S.S.F. vs Denmark’s violation of art. 2,3,12 of CEDAW and articles 3 and 19 of CRC 

Danish authorities decided to withdraw the refugee status of a Somali single mother of four (S.S.F). The mother applied for asylum on behalf of her youngest daughter S.M.F. who is not circumcised, claiming that she had not been able to prevent her first two daughters from being circumcised against her will in Somalia.

They both needed to be deported according to the decisions of the Danish Refugees Appeals Board and Danish Immigration Appeals Board dated 28 May 2019 and 31 July 2019. 

The applicant’s mother is against circumcision of her daughter, and that a majority of the Refugee Board has assumed that the mother will be able to oppose pressure from the surrounding environment, and confirmed therefore the Immigration Service’s decision. 

– S.M.F. can be suffered FGM if deported to Somalia;
– Risk of persecution from her former spouse and his family

S.S.F. presented compliance for violation of CRC article 3 and article 19 as well as the principle of non-refoulement. The Government in its comments submitted that the communication is inadmissible as manifestly ill-founded. 

UN Children’s Committee states that the committee has found that a deportation would constitute a violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child as far as S.M.F. will risk forced circumcision if she returns to Somalia.

Refugee Appeals Board granted the author’s daughter S.M.F. asylum under section 7 (1) of the Danish Aliens Act. Consequently, the author and the author’s three other children have also been granted asylum. 

4. October 2023

CRC 96/2019
  • Decision: 27 May 2022
  • Comm: Child