CCPR/C/120/D/2470/2014
not be able to provide for her son’s basic needs. She expected to face homelessness and
destitution, being entirely dependent on churches for food.
2.5
According to the registration report of 16 August 2012 prepared by the National
Aliens Centre of the Danish National Police, the author declared that on her arrival in Italy
that she had been hospitalized due to her pregnancy; that she had not asked or applied for
asylum in Italy or received a residence permit or any other documents from the authorities;
and that in March 2012, she had travelled to Sweden with a counterfeit Italian passport
because the living conditions in Italy were not adequate for a pregnant woman. She referred
to the poor quality of food, lack of access to water and the fact that she had been left on her
own and unable to support herself.
2.6
On 19 March 2013, the Immigration Service requested information from Italy under
article 21 of the Dublin Regulation. On 4 June 2013, the Italian authorities informed the
Danish Immigration Service that the author had been granted residency in the form of
subsidiary protection in Italy until 22 December 2014.
2.7
On 18 November 2013, the author was interviewed by the Immigration Service.
According to the report of that interview, the author stated that she was not sure that she
had been granted residency in Italy; that she had been given many documents and did not
know whether they had included a residence permit; that she had been ill and had been
treated at hospital; that she had not been hospitalized, but that a nurse had visited her at
home in a rural dwelling where she was living at that time; and that she had left Italy
immediately after she had recovered. During the interview, the author was informed that,
on 4 June 2013, the Italian authorities had stated that she had been granted subsidiary
protection and a residence permit valid until 22 December 2014. She was also informed that,
according to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in Samsam Mohammed
Hussein and Others v. the Netherlands and Italy,1 a person granted subsidiary protection in
Italy would be provided with a renewable residence permit with a validity of three years;
and that such a permit entitled its holder to, inter alia, a travel document for aliens and the
right to work, family reunification, social assistance, health care, social housing and
education under Italian national law. 2 The author provided no comment regarding this
information. On the same day, the Immigration Service determined that the author was in
need of subsidiary protection owing to her situation in Somalia, but that she should be
deported to Italy as her fist country of asylum. The author appealed the decision before the
Refugee Appeals Board.
2.8
At the hearing before the Board, the author stated that she had lived a difficult life in
Italy since, after receiving little food, she had been undernourished, fainted often and
almost had a miscarriage. However, no one took her to a hospital. She had complained
about those living conditions, without success. Therefore, if she were returned to Italy, her
life would be at risk.
2.9
On 13 January 2014, the Board considered that the author fell within the purview of
section 7 (2) of the Aliens Act as a result of the persecution by Al-Shabaab 3 and that,
consequently, the question was whether Italy could serve as her first country of asylum, in
accordance with section 7 (3) of the Aliens Act.4 The Board referred to the decision of the
European Court in Samsam Mohammed Hussein and Others v. the Netherlands and Italy5
and found that it could not be accepted as fact that the author would have starved to death if
she had stayed in Italy; that the author would be protected against refoulement on her return
to Italy, where she had been granted temporary residence until the end of 2014; and that the
1
2
3
4
5
Application No. 27725/10, decision of 2 April 2013.
The Board’s decision of 13 January 2014 refers to the decision of the European Court in Samsam
Mohammed Hussein and Others v. the Netherlands and Italy, paras. 37-39.
Section 7 (2) establishes: “Upon application, a residence permit will be issued to an alien if the alien
risks the death penalty or being subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
in case of return to his country of origin.”
Section 7 (3) establishes: “A residence permit under subsections (1) and (2) may be refused if the
alien has already obtained protection in another country, or if the alien has close ties with another
country where the alien must be deemed able to obtain protection.”
See paragraph 38 of the decision.
3