CCPR/C/121/D/2643/2015
2.5
In Switzerland, the author’s husband was convicted for domestic violence towards
her and was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. Due to this judgment, he was to be
expelled from Switzerland to Sri Lanka following his imprisonment. Before being expelled
from Switzerland, he forced the author and their children to accompany him to Denmark.
As the author had refused to leave, she was sedated in order to force her to travel to
Denmark. The author and her husband entered Denmark on 25 May 2012 without valid
travel documents.10 On 29 May 2012, they applied for asylum. 11
2.6
In Denmark, the author’s husband forced her to make a false statement as to her
identity and grounds for asylum in order to avoid being transferred back to Switzerland.
Thus, the asylum claims of the author and her family were treated in Denmark. Under
severe pressure from her husband, the author gave the false statement as presented in the
decision of 20 December 2012 issued by the Danish Immigration Service. The author’s
former husband stated as a motive for seeking asylum that he had been detained by the
military in August 2009. Subsequently, it was alleged that the author had addressed the
nearest Sri Lankan Army camp to seek information about her husband’s whereabouts.
Allegedly, on that occasion, she suffered sexual abuse by members of the Sri Lankan Army.
From then and until 2010, it was claimed that the Army regularly visited the female
applicant at her home and sexually abused her. The Danish Immigration Service decided to
reject the author’s asylum application. The decision was upheld by the Danish Refugee
Appeals Board on 20 June 2013. The Board considered that the male asylum applicant had
very limited associations with LTTE and that there was therefore no basis for granting him
and his family residence permits.
2.7
The author was very afraid of her husband, who threatened to kill her and to take
their children away if she did not support his false version of the events. He also physically
assaulted the author and her children. This was confirmed by notes in the author’s medical
records made by her psychologist in early 2013.12 On 26 February 2013, the psychologist
noted that the author “looked like someone who had had to put on necessary makeup to
cover her face”.
2.8
In 2013, the author’s former husband was returned to Sri Lanka after he had
assaulted another person in Denmark. The author testified against her former husband in
that context. After his return to Sri Lanka, the author’s former husband contacted the author
by phone and threatened to kill her if she ever returned to Sri Lanka.
2.9
After the return of her former husband to Sri Lanka, the author felt that she could
safely present her true grounds for seeking asylum in Denmark. On 24 June 2013, the
author sent a letter to the Danish Refugee Appeals Board with a request to reopen her case,
explaining her real motives for seeking asylum. On 17 September 2013, the Board refused
to reopen the author’s asylum case. On 10 January 2014, the Board again rejected the
author’s request to reopen her asylum case, as she had not provided any new information to
justify reconsideration of the decision to deny her asylum. On 16 January 2014, the author’s
application for residence on humanitarian grounds of 26 June 2013 was rejected by the
Danish Ministry of Justice.
2.10 Following these negative decisions, the author went back to Switzerland on 19
January 2014. However, she was returned to Denmark in July 2014 pursuant to the
Convention determining the State responsible for examining applications for asylum lodged
in one of the Member States of the European Communities (the Dublin Convention). On 20
November 2014, the Danish Refugee Council again asked the Board to reopen the author’s
case. As one of the reasons for its request, the counsel stated that the author, prior to
entering Denmark on 25 May 2012, had held a residence permit in Switzerland since 2001,
and that the author had been sexually abused by her former husband.
10
11
12
They have no family ties with Denmark.
At the time of their asylum application, both the author and her husband stated that they had been
married since 1998 but did not have a marriage certificate, as their “marriage” was not officially
registered. This assertion contradicts the author’s statement that she met her husband once in
Switzerland.
According to the medical notes attached to the complaint, the author’s psychologist was concerned
about the author’s well-being because of the difficulties she faced with her former husband.
3