Immigration law / Deportation / Forcible return
|
B.B. v. Sweden (Communication No. 3069/2015)
The Committee considered that the State party failed to adequately assess the author’s real, personal and foreseeable risk of returning to Afghanistan, in particular taking into account his father’s alleged threats of revenge and his trauma as a result of parental abuse. Accordingly, the Committee considers that the State party failed to give due consideration to the consequences of the author’s personal situation in Afghanistan and concludes that his removal to Afghanistan by the State party would constitute a violation of articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant. 30 April 2021 | Judicial Body: UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Human rights law | Countries: Afghanistan - Sweden |
|
Communication no. 2149/2012 : Human Rights Committee : views adopted by the Committee at its 108th session, 8-26 July 2013
26 September 2013 | Publisher: UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) | Document type: Country/Situation Specific Position Papers |
|
Mahmoud Walid Nakrash and Liu Qifen v. Sweden
Display in UN document template Original: ENGLISH 19 October 2008 | Judicial Body: UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Country of origin information (COI) - Deportation / Forcible return - Expulsion - Refoulement - Right to family life | Countries: Sweden |
|
Mohammed Alzery v. Sweden
Display in UN document template Original: ENGLISH 10 November 2006 | Judicial Body: UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Diplomatic assurances - Expulsion - False documents - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Persecution based on political opinion - Refoulement | Countries: Egypt - Sweden |
