ICCPR Case Digest




Submission: 2014.07.31

View Adopted: 2021.11.05

M.N. v Denmark

Unsubstantiated claims on the principle of non- refoulement leads to the communication being declared inadmissible

Substantive Issues
  • Fair trial
  • Fair trial
  • Freedom of religion
  • Freedom of religion
  • Non-discrimination
  • Non-discrimination
  • Right to life
  • Torture / ill-treatment
  • Torture / ill-treatment
Relevant Articles
  • Article 13
  • Article 14
  • Article 18
  • Article 2
  • Article 26
  • Article 6
  • Article 7
Full Text


The author, a national of Afghanistan, claims that by deporting him, the State Party would violate his rights under articles 2, 6, 7, 13, 14, 18 and 26 of the Covenant. The author, fearing persecution for distributing Bibles in Afghanistan, flew to Denmark, where he was arrested by the police on 1 November 2013, as the travel documents were invalid. He applied for asylum in Denmark, which the Refugee Appeals Board rejected. The author requested interim measures from the Committee to halt his deportation as it would violate his rights under articles 2,6,7,13,14,18 and 26 of the Covenant. On 24 October 2014, the Committee registered his communication but did not grant interim measures.



The Committee considers that the author’s claims of a violation of his right to a fair trial in the context of article 13, and of discrimination, including on the basis of his status as an asylum seeker, under articles 2 and 26, read in conjunction with article 14 of the Covenant are insufficiently substantiated for the purposes of admissibility. Recalling the Committee’s jurisprudence, it considers that claims under article 14 to be inadmissible ratione materiae,.  The Committee observes that the State party’s authorities considered the author’s reasons for fleeing Afghanistan  and the related asylum motives to be unsubstantiated, taking into account the inconsistencies in his arguments and submissions and lack of credibility as first his letters were fraudulent and second, his employer could not confirm that he worked at Combined Team Uruzgan. The author failed to establish that he would risk facing circumstances contrary to article 6 or 7 of the Covenant as a consequence of his alleged conversion to Christianity, if returned to Afghanistan. Accordingly, owing to lack of substantiation, this part of the communication is inadmissible.



Deadline is 4th May 2022.

By Aakrishti Kumar

deneme bonusu bonus veren siteler bonus veren siteler deneme bonusu veren siteler aiaswo.org cafetinnova.org
deneme bonusu veren siteler obeclms.com bonus veren siteler

Rules of Procedure of the Human Rights Committee

Rules of Procedure of the Human Rights Committee CCPR/C/3/Rev.10

Arabic | Chinese | English | French | Russian | Spanish

CCPR NGO Participation

Documents adopted by the Human Rights Committee (March 2012)

English | French | Spanish | Russian | Handbook

CCPR NHRI Participation

Documents adopted by the Human Rights Committee (November 2012)

English | French | Spanish | Russian | Arabic | Chinese