CCPR/C/121/D/2594/2015
ranking official in the security forces in Afghanistan. On 17 November 2014, the authors
presented new information arguing that K.S., a convinced agnostic, would face an
individual risk upon return to Afghanistan, and that the sister’s former husband “would
expose K.S. as an apostate”.
2.8
On 19 March 2015, the Refugee Appeals Board rejected the authors’ request to
reopen the asylum proceedings. It rejected the information about the sister’s former
husband on the grounds that it did not contain a credible explanation as to why such
information had not been presented before. The Board concluded that no new important
information had been provided to justify a reopening of the case. It also rejected the
argument that K.S. would face an individual risk in Afghanistan as an agnostic, by
considering that, since the author had not been “active about his views”, he would not face
persecution for that reason in Afghanistan, based on several reports according to which a
non-believer would not face any problems or sanctions as long as they did not display any
lack of respect for Islam.6 In that regard, the Board noted that K.S. had never made any
visible public expression of his views on religion or otherwise participated in the public
debate, whether in Afghanistan or after his departure. It also noted that K.S. had not
initially presented his lack of religious beliefs as grounds for asylum, before either the
Danish Immigration Service or the Board, but had merely stated that he was a non-believer.
Since the information about the sister’s former husband was dismissed as lacking
credibility, the Board did not examine the possibility that the former husband would expose
K.S. as an apostate in Afghanistan.
2.9
K.S. notes that he is a member of several Facebook groups supporting free speech,
human rights and the rights of atheists and agnostics. In that context, he has repeatedly
posted material that could be perceived as insulting to Muslims. That material has received
attention both from Afghans in Afghanistan and members of the Afghan diaspora in
Denmark. For example, he received a Facebook message from a government official who
worked in the Office of the President of Afghanistan in response to a Facebook post. 7
2.10 M.S. has allegedly been diagnosed with severe mental health issues, including
depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and personality change. Her most recent
psychiatric report 8 concluded that her current level of function was “that of a person
suffering from chronic psychosis or dementia”. She is under daily care from her family in
Denmark. On 6 August 2014, M.S. applied for a residence permit on humanitarian grounds.
Her application was rejected on 14 November 2014. She notes that, according to
established practice, single Afghan women without support networks in Afghanistan are
eligible for a residence permit on humanitarian grounds owing to their extreme
vulnerability. In the present case, the rejection was based on two main arguments: first, she
was not considered a single woman without a network, as she would be returned with her
adult son, K.S.; and second, her health condition was not considered to be so severe as to
meet the Danish requirements for granting residence for health reasons. The Refugee
Appeals Board noted that M.S. suffered from unspecified depression, personality change
caused by catastrophic experiences and post-traumatic stress disorder. Yet, according to the
information provided, her mental disorder did not require therapy. The authors note that the
Board did not take into account that K.S. had not been to Afghanistan since the age of 7 and
could therefore not be considered as a “network”, as he himself had no network in
Afghanistan and was in no condition to offer his mother the typical support of a network,
such as attending to her needs and supporting her financially.
6
7
8
The Board relied on a 2009 report by Landinfo on the risk of abuse in Afghanistan of atheists or
individuals who have left Islam in case of return; a 2013 report by Landinfo on the situation of
Christians and converts in Afghanistan; and a 2014 report by Landinfo on the situation of atheists in
Afghanistan, in which it is stated that, as opposed to converts, who show their affiliation with another
religion through religious practices, atheists/non-believers would not face sanctions as long as they do
not display any lack of respect for Islam in public.
The author does not specify the context or content of the referred message.
The authors attach a psychiatric report dated 25 July 2014, with the referred diagnosis for author M.S.
3