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.