CAT/C/31/D/199/2002
Page 3
expulsion decision until further notice, and, as a result, she remains lawfully in Sweden at the
present time.
The facts as presented
2.1
In 1982, the complainant’s husband, Mr. A, was arrested on account of his
family connection to his cousin, who had been arrested for suspected involvement in the
assassination of the former Egyptian President, Anwar Sadat. Before his release in March
1983, Mr. A was allegedly subjected to “torture and other forms of physical abuse”. Mr. A,
active in the Islamic movement, completed his studies in 1986 and married the complainant.
He avoided various police searches, but suffered difficulties, such as the arrest of his attorney,
upon bringing a civil claim in 1991 against the Ministry of Home Affairs, for suffering during
his time in prison.
2.2
In 1992, Mr. A left Egypt on security grounds for Saudi Arabia, and thereafter to
Pakistan, where the complainant and her children joined him. After difficulties with passport
non-renewal and confiscation by the Egyptian embassy in Pakistan, the family left for Syria
under assumed Sudanese identities. There they were visited by family members from Egypt,
who were arrested and had their passports confiscated upon their return to Egypt, in order to
determine Mr. A’s whereabouts. In December 1995, the family moved to Iran under the same
Sudanese identities.
2.3
In 1998, Mr. A was tried for terrorist activity in absentia before a higher military
court in Egypt, along with one hundred other accused. He was found guilty of belonging to an
Islamic fundamentalist group, Al-Gihad, having intention to overthrow the Egyptian
government, and was sentenced, without possibility of appeal, to 25 years’ imprisonment. In
2000, concerned that warming ties between Egypt and Iran might result in his being returned
to Egypt, Mr. A and his family purchased air tickets under Saudi Arabian identities for
Canada, and claimed asylum during a transit stop in Stockholm, Sweden, on 23 September
2000.
2.4
In his asylum application, he claimed that he had been sentenced to “penal
servitude for life” in absentia, and that if returned, he would be executed as other accused
allegedly had been. The complainant contended that, if returned, she would be detained for
many years, on account of her status as Mr. A’s wife and corresponding guilt by association.
On 23 May 2001, the Migration Board invited the Swedish National Police Board (Special
Branch) to submit its opinion in the matter, and the Special Branch subsequently conducted
an interview with Mr A. On 3 October 2001, with legal representation, the Migration Board
held a “major inquiry” with Mr. A and the complainant. On 30 October 2001, the Swedish
National Police Board (Special Branch) informed the Migration Board that Mr A. had a
leading position in an organisation guilty of terrorist acts and was responsible for activities of
the organisation. The case of Mr. A and the complainant was thus remitted, on 12 November
2001, to the Government for decision pursuant to chapter 7, section 11(2)(2) of the Aliens
Act. In the Board’s view, on the information before it, Mr. A could be considered entitled to
refugee status, however the Special Branch assessment, which the Board saw no reason to
question, pointed in a completely different direction. The necessary weighing of Mr. A’s
possible need for protection, as against the Special Branch’s assessment, was thus to be made
by the Government. On 13 November 2001, the Aliens Appeals Board, to which the case had
been forwarded, shared the Migration Board’s assessment of the merits and was also of the
view that the Government should decide the matter.