Religion – Weltanschauung – Recht [ RWR ]

At its last meeting (Monday 8 September 2014), the Grand Chamber panel of five judges decided to refer the following case to the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights: W.H. v. Sweden (no. 49341/10): concerning the deportation of a failed-asylum seeker from Sweden to Iraq.

The applicant, W.H., is an Iraqi national who was born in 1978 and currently lives in Sweden. She is originally from Baghdad and is of Mandaean denomination. She arrived in Sweden in August 2007 and subsequently claimed asylum. Her request was examined by the Migration Board and Migration Court and ultimately rejected in 2010 on the ground that she was not in need of protection in Sweden.

Relying on Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights, W. H. alleges that, a divorcee belonging to a small, vulnerable ethnic/religious minority, she would be at real risk of inhuman and degrading treatment if returned to Iraq. She submits in particular that, without a male network or any remaining relatives in Iraq, she would be at risk of persecution, assault, rape, forced conversion to another religion and forced marriage.

In its Chamber judgment of 27 March 2014 the Court held, unanimously, that W.H.’s deportation to Iraq would not involve a violation of Article 3, provided that she was not returned to parts of the country situated outside the Kurdistan Region. The Court concluded that, although the applicant, as a Mandaean single woman, might face a real risk of being subjected to treatment contrary to Article 3 if returned to the southern and central parts of Iraq, she could reasonably relocate to the Kurdistan Region, where neither the general situation nor her personal circumstances would put her at risk of inhuman and degrading treatment. The Court further decided to indicate to the Swedish Government, under Rule 39 (interim measures) of its Rules of Court, not to deport the applicant to Iraq until the Chamber judgment became final or until further order.

On 8 September 2014 the case was referred to the Grand Chamber at the request of the applicant.

Press release ECHR 250 (2014) 09/09/2014