CCPR/C/123/D/2575/2015
she was working as a cleaner and lived in a room that she managed to rent with three other
female refugees. Owing to the economic crisis, she lost her job and was thrown out of the
room she had rented. Meanwhile, she had found out that she was pregnant. She tried to see
a doctor but was refused medical examination. 3 She was facing a situation where she had no
accommodation and would have to return to live in the abandoned building, where she had
previously been assaulted. As she feared for the safety of her unborn child and the living
conditions in the abandoned building, she decided to leave Italy for Denmark. 4 On 10
October 2014, she submitted an asylum application in Denmark. The author’s son was born
on 8 December 2014.5
2.6
On 30 November 2014, the Danish Immigration Service requested the Italian
authorities to agree to take the author back in accordance with the Dublin Regulation. On
15 December 2014, the Italian authorities informed the Danish Immigration Service that the
author had been granted subsidiary protection in Italy, including a residence permit, and
thus could not be accepted in accordance with the Dublin Regulation. On 16 December
2014, the Immigration Service decided to refuse entry into Denmark of the author and her
son and not to process their application for asylum, as they had been granted international
protection in Italy. Consequently, the author was ordered to leave Denmark immediately. 6
The author and her son, aged two and a half months, were scheduled to be deported to Italy
on 26 February 2015.
2.7
After the case was brought to the attention of the Committee, the State party decided
to reopen the author’s asylum case for reconsideration by the Immigration Service. On 29
October 2015, the Immigration Service rejected the author’s application for asylum once
again. That decision was upheld by the Refugee Appeals Board on 12 February 2016; the
Board considered that the author would be able to access sufficient financial and social
protection if she returned to Italy, where, prior to her departure to Denmark, she had been
granted a residence permit.
2.8
The author claims that she has exhausted all available and effective domestic
remedies, as the decisions of the Refugee Appeals Board cannot be appealed to
administrative bodies or Danish courts, according to the Danish Aliens Act. The author has
not submitted her communication to any other procedure of international investigation or
settlement.
The complaint
3.1
The author claims, in reference to article 7 of the Covenant, that her forcible return
to Italy would amount to a violation of her and her child’s rights by the State party, as she
was not able to find adequate housing, legal work, sufficient food or any temporary or
durable humanitarian solution, despite receiving international protection in Italy.
3.2
She emphasizes the fear of being sent back to an unsafe environment with a newborn baby. In particular, she fears being forced to live on the streets with her son, without
access to adequate medical assistance. The author also fears that she will not be able to
access adequate housing and food for herself and her child owing to the reported
shortcomings of Italian reception conditions for asylum seekers and recognized refugees
with residence permits.
3.3
The author therefore claims that their deportation to Italy would put them at a real
risk of irreparable harm by exposing her, and in particular her son, to inhuman and
degrading treatment by living on the streets in destitution, with no prospect of finding a
durable humanitarian solution, contrary to the best interests of the child.
3.4
The author adds that, according to the Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the principle of first country of asylum should only
be applied if the applicant, upon return to the first country of asylum, “is permitted to
3
4
5
6
GE.19-07290
No further details or evidence have been provided.
The author lived in Italy for six years, from July 2008 to October 2014.
The author attaches to her communication a Danish birth certificate attesting that her son was born on
8 December 2014.
The decision was made in accordance with the Danish Aliens Act, article 48 (a), section 1.
3