CCPR/C/117/D/2745/2016
observations from the State party were needed to ascertain the admissibility of the
communication.
The facts as presented by the authors
2.1
V.R. and N.R met in 2003 in the Islamic Republic of Iran and started a relationship
without the knowledge of their parents.
2.2. In 2005, N.R.’s parents arranged for her to marry someone else, A. After the
wedding, the authors continued their relationship in secret for six years until A. discovered
it. The authors managed to flee the Islamic Republic of Iran and went to Romania. On an
unspecified date, A. found out that they were in Romania. In Romania, on an unspecified
date, the authors were refused asylum. They decided to go back to the Islamic Republic of
Iran given that A. thought that they were in Romania. They stayed there for a short period
of time.
2.3
On an unspecified date in 2012, the authors travelled to Denmark. While in a
“refugee camp”, in April 2012, they became interested in Christianity. They found solace
and peace in prayers and singing psalms. On an unspecified date, the authors were
transferred to a “refugee camp” in Vipperød. They could not go to church there as they
lacked the financial means to cover the cost of travel. After they were transferred to a
“refugee camp” in Jelling (Jutland), they went to a church almost every Sunday. The
authors were baptized in June 2014.
2.4
On 12 April 2012, the authors applied for asylum in Denmark. Their application was
rejected by the Danish Immigration Service on 19 December 2013. On an unspecified date,
they appealed the rejection before the Danish Refugee Appeals Board. During the appeal
proceedings, they mentioned that they had converted to Christianity and that they feared
returning to the Islamic Republic of Iran because of their conversion. The authors note that
they did not mention their conversion to Christianity during the initial stages of the asylum
proceedings as they did not know it would have any bearing on the decision in the case.
2.5
On 19 September 2014, the Danish Refugee Appeals Board rejected the authors’
appeal and found that they would not risk persecution or abuse in the Islamic Republic of
Iran. The Board noted, inter alia, that the authors mentioned their conversion to Christianity
only after the Immigration Service’s negative decision and that their, especially V.R.’s,
knowledge about Christianity was only general and superficial. Consequently, the Board
could not accept that their conversion was genuine and that they would perform Christian
acts of worship in the Islamic Republic of Iran. On 9 March 2014, the authors requested to
reopen their asylum case owing to their conversion, but it was rejected by the Board on
17 August 2015 as they had not adduced any new significant information. The authors were
asked to leave the country voluntarily within 15 days.
The complaint
3.
The authors claim that their deportation to the Islamic Republic of Iran would
constitute a violation of their rights under articles 6, 7 and 18 of the Covenant. They
contend that their conversion to Christianity was genuine and that “the mere formal
conversion in itself constitutes a high risk for the authors” to be tortured or severely
harassed. They also fear persecution from A.
2