CEDAW: Committee publishes views on R.S.A.A and others v Denmark

On 10 September 2019, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) published its adopted views in relation to the case of R.S.A.A and Others v Denmark. The case concerned the threat of deportation of a stateless Palestinian applicant and her two daughters to Jordan.

The applicant and her daughters had previously resided in Jordan, where she was married to a Jordanian national. They were exposed to threats and abuse from her husband and his family during this time. This abuse escalated after the applicant objected to the forced marriage of her eldest daughter, which resulted in her being beaten and tortured by her husband. The applicant’s middle daughter was due to be married at the age of 15 to a 35 year old man. The applicant and her two youngest daughters subsequently fled Jordan for Denmark, where they unsuccessfully applied for asylum. 

The applicant complains that by ordering deportation, the State had breached its obligation under Articles 1, 2 (e), (f), and 15(4) of the CEDAW Convention. The applicants claimed that there was a serious threat of inhuman and degrading treatment, domestic violence, abuse, and potentially death if they were deported. Referring to CEDAW General Recommendations No. 19 and No. 35, the applicants argued that the State had failed to apply a gender sensitive approach or safeguards in its decision regarding her husband’s aggressive and controlling behaviour, and the cumulative impact of all of his actions.

In its assessment, the Committee noted that the applicant and her daughters would be exposed to a real risk of gender-based violence if returned to Jordan. This risk would increase due to the inability for the applicants to seek protection from Jordanian authorities due to legislative and practical discrimination against women and their status as a Palestinian refugee. Moreover, the Committee noted that the risks posed to the daughters were real and foreseeable, and it was apparent that no specific consideration of the likelihood of forced marriage had been made by the Refugee Appeals Board.

In light of these considerations, the Committee adopted the view that the State party had failed to fulfil its obligations under the CEDAW Convention and the deportation would amount to a violation under Articles 2 (d), (e), and (f) in conjunction with Article 1. The Committee recommended the State reopen the asylum case and refrain from deporting the applicants. It also recommended the Danish Government implement the following general measures: ensure no applicants facing a real risk of gender-based violence are deported; the threshold for asylum applications is measured not against the probability but the reasonable likelihood a claimant has a well-founded fear of persecution or exposure to persecution upon return; and women asylum applicants are provided with timely information regarding international protection procedures.

This item was reproduced with the permission of ECRE from the ELENA Weekly Legal Update. The purpose of these updates is to inform asylum lawyers and legal organizations supporting asylum seekers and refugees of recent developments in the field of asylum law. Please note that the information provided is taken from publicly available information on the internet. Every reasonable effort is made to make the content accurate and up to date at the time each item is pusexblished but no responsibility for its accuracy and correctness, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed by ECRE.