CAT/C/37/D/286/2006
Page 4
4.3 In an interview on 17 November 1999, the author added the he had joined the INC
(Iraqi National Congress) in 1992 and that he had been involved in the attempts to form a
new government in Salahaddin. On 10 May 2000, the Immigration Board rejected the
complainant’s application for asylum and ordered that he should be expelled to the
Netherlands in accordance with the Dublin Convention1. It stated that the author had provided
false or contradictory information concerning his travel route to Sweden, that he had
absconded from the asylum proceedings in the Netherlands, and that he had omitted to inform
the Board of these proceedings.
4.4 On 20 June 2000, the complainant was arrested by the Swedish police, as he was
suspected of smuggling heroin and aggravated drug offence. By a judgment of 7 March 2001
of the District Court of Norrköping, the author was convicted as charged. Fourteen other men
were also convicted in this context. The Court considered the complainant and two of his
brothers to be the leading organisers of systematic criminal activities involving smuggling,
sale and re-sale of heroin2. He was sentenced to eight years imprisonment and the Court
ordered his expulsion from Sweden with a permanent prohibition to return. When
determining the length of imprisonment, the Court took into consideration the inconvenience
the expulsion would cause him. Because the Immigration Board had considered that he could
be expelled to the Netherlands, no assessment was made with respect to a potential expulsion
to Iraq. In a judgment of 8 June 2001, the Göta Court of Appeal upheld the author’s
conviction and sentence. On 9 July 2001, the Supreme Court denied the author leave to
appeal.
4.5 On 25 March 2003, the complainant requested the Government to cancel the expulsion
order, on the grounds that absolute impediments under chapter 8, section 1, of the Aliens Act3,
were at hand. He stated that he had received information that he would not be granted entry to
the Netherlands and that he would therefore be expelled to Iraq, where he would face death
penalty, because he was involved in a family feud. On 17 July 2003, the Government rejected
his request for cancellation of the expulsion order, as it found no impediments against
enforcement of the expulsion order.
4.6 On 7 December 2004, the author lodged a new application for asylum and a residence
permit. An in-depth interview was held with the author on 1 December 2004, in the presence
of counsel. He stated inter alia that when he left Lebanon by boat in 1997, he had been
discovered by Israeli ships and taken to Israel for interrogations. He claimed that he would be
regarded as an Israeli spy by the Iraqi authorities and that it is generally believed in Iraq that
he has converted to Judaism. According to Islamic laws, followers of Judaism shall be
1
Convention determining the State responsible for examining applications for asylum lodged
in one of the Member States of the European Communities.
2
The Court also noted that the availability of heroin in Norrköping had increased and the
prices had decreased after the complainant’s organization had been established, and that the
availability of heroin had decreased and the prices increased after the arrest of the
complainant and his accomplices.
3
According to Chapter 8, section 1, of the 1989 Aliens Act (in force at the time the
complainant’s case was considered), there was an absolute impediment against expelling an
alien to a country where there were reasonable grounds to believe that he would be in danger
of suffering capital or corporal punishment or of being subjected to torture or other inhuman
or degrading treatment or punishment. A risk of persecution would also generally constitute
an impediment against enforcing an expulsion decision.