CCPR/C/132/D/2787/2016Advance unedited version submit the communication on their behalf and on behalf of their two minor children, A.J.R., born in October 2005 and R.J.R., born in January 2004. They were scheduled to be deported to Bulgaria on 19 July 2016. 1.2 The authors claim that, if deported to Bulgaria, their family would be at risk of irreparable harm, in violation of their rights under article 7 and article 24 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Covenant). They also sought interim measures from the Committee to halt their deportation. The first Optional Protocol to the Covenant entered into force for Denmark on 23 March 1976. The authors are represented by counsel, Ms. Kale Anwar, from the Danish Refugee Council. 1.3 On 18 July 2016, the Committee issued an interim measures request whereby the State party should refrain from deporting the authors to Bulgaria pending the consideration of their communication. The facts as submitted by the authors 2.1 The authors originate from Aleppo and Afrin, Syria. They are of Kurdish ethnicity. On 5 October 2014, they fled Syria for Turkey after the Syrian authorities were looking for the male author in their house. The authors then fled from Turkey to Bulgaria. 2.2 On 26 October 2014, the authors entered Bulgaria and stayed there until early June 2015. The smuggler, who was helping them to travel from Turkey through Bulgaria to Denmark, wanted the rest of his money, but the male author would not pay him before they reached Denmark. The smuggler then threatened them and gave them an ultimatum, either to pay him or he would take revenge on the female author and their minor daughter. 2.3 During their stay in Bulgaria, the authors experienced very difficult conditions as they did not receive any form of support from the authorities in relation to finding an accommodation, a job and schooling for their children. 2.4 After being granted protection in Bulgaria, the family stayed at the asylum centre as they had no other option. The authors’ main reason for fleeing Bulgaria and entering Denmark and lodging an application for asylum there, was the fear of being forced to live on the streets without any access to support from the Bulgarian authorities. 2.5 In June 2015, the family left Bulgaria. On 4 June 2015, they entered Denmark and lodged an application for international protection there. 2.6 On 1 June 2016, the Danish Immigration Service (Service) rejected their asylum applications as they had been issued a residence permit in Bulgaria. The family was ordered to leave Denmark immediately, pursuant to the Danish Aliens Act, section 29 (b). The authors were notified of the decision by the Danish Police on 10 June 2016. The decision of the Service was appealed to the Refugee Appeals Board (Board) on 6 July 2016; however, the appeal did not have a suspensive effect. The Danish Police informed the counsel that the deportation to Bulgaria was scheduled for 19 July 2016. The authors requested the Committee to issue interim measures in order to halt the deportation that was imminent. 2.7 As regards the responsibilities of the State party under article 7 of the Covenant, the authors refer to the decisions by the European Court of Human Rights in M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece, Samsam Mohammad Hussein and Others v. the Netherlands and Italy, and Tarakhel v. Switzerland.2 The fact that the authors in the present case have been granted protection as refugees and are protected from refoulement in Bulgaria, does not exclude the risk of them being faced with harsh living conditions, homelessness and destitution with no realistic prospect of finding a durable, humanitarian solution, constituting a violation of article 7 of the Covenant. 2.8 The authors contend that they have exhausted all available and effective domestic remedies. The same matter has not been and is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. 2 2 European Court of Human Rights, applications no. 30696/09, 27725/10 and 29217/12.

Select target paragraph3