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) | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Human rights law | Countries: Afghanistan - Sweden |
A.B.H. v. Denmark
In such circumstances, the Committee considers that the Refugee Appeals Board failed to adequately assess the author’s real, personal and foreseeable risk if he were returned to Afghanistan, which is based not solely on his profile as a former employee of the international forces but also on the risk of future ill-treatment by the Taliban which reasonably follows from his individual circumstances including his past ill-treatment in his country of origin. 18 November 2019 | Judicial Body: UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) | Legal Instrument: 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) | Topic(s): Combatants / Former combatants - Deportation / Forcible return - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment | Countries: Afghanistan - Denmark |
Muneer Ahmed Husseini v. Denmark
26 November 2014 | Judicial Body: UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) | Topic(s): Children's rights - Deportation / Forcible return - Effective remedy - Expulsion - Right to family life | Countries: Afghanistan - Denmark |