In 2015, after civil war in Syria, many Syrians left their country and sought refuge in Europe. In response to the influx of refugees, Denmark passed a law establishing a temporary residence status for people fleeing indiscriminate violence rather than having them face individual persecution. Under this law, Syrian refugees with temporary protection risk losing their residence status as soon as there is any improvement in security on the ground back in their home countries, even if the situation remains “fragile and unpredictable.” Yet, the reality is Syria is still grappling with human rights abuses, particularly against women.
In March 2021, Denmark became the first European nation to annul residency permits of Syrian refugees from the Rif Damascus and Damascus regions. The revocation of residency permits came to light because of the recent declaration of these regions as safe by Denmark’s government on the basis of a Country of Origin (COI) report. However, the report’s findings were condemned by eleven out of twelve experts involved in its drafting because the findings and conclusion of the COI report were not in consonance with the reality on the ground in Syria. These experts believe that the present conditions in Syria do not call for the safe return of refugees to Syria. Therefore, the experts urged the Danish government to revise its conclusions, reflect on the ongoing risks posed to potential returnees, and amend its current refugee policy.
Mattias Tesfaye, Denmark’s Immigration Minister, approved of the decision, stating that the government had made it crystal clear to the refugees that their permits were temporary, whilst PM Mette Frederiksen said that she is committed to making Denmark a country with zero asylum seekers.
Denmark, which is considered as the frontrunner in gender equality, has thus paradoxically created a harsh and inhospitable environment for Syrian refugees, and especially women refugees. This article will analyse the human rights abuses against women in Syria, disproportionate impact of Denmark’s zero asylum policy on women refugees and the resulting infringements of international human rights law.
The grim reality of human rights abuses against women in Syria
In 1998, a recommendation was passed by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (hereinafter PACE), which discussed the state of affairs for women refugees in Europe. With Denmark being a member of the PACE, it had to take all the necessary measures to eradicate any kind of gender-based discrimination amongst the refugees. Its conduct since has demonstrated that it is not in consonance with the recommendations made by PACE. Instead, Denmark has adopted a forceful and multi-tiered approach to driving out an already vulnerable group of women. It is an open secret that women in Syria are subjected to numerous human rights violations. The 2021 report by the UN High commissioner for refugees further fortifies the kind of gut-wrenching harassment and torture that women are encountered within Rif Damascus and Damascus regions which, again, Denmark affirms as “safe.” Deplorable acts such as sexual violence, exploitation, arbitrary detention and torture lie ahead of the women refugees if they are repatriated Upon their return, the incumbent Syrian regime, Assad, will likely tyrannize and apprehend refugees for absconding. Once apprehended, the women refugees, in all likelihood, will never be seen again, as approximately 98,000 women refugees have gone missing after returning to Syria. According to this UN report returning refugees are subjected to nightmare sufferings by the Syrian government. They have fallen prey to inhumane torture and arbitrary detention. Therefore, rather than protecting the women refugees, Denmark is not paying heed to the kind of atrocities they will encounter in Syria.
Infringement of international rights and gender discrimination
Article 60(3) of the Istanbul Convention to which Denmark is a signatory requires states to develop gender-sensitive procedures for determining refugee status so that there is no discrimination against asylum seekers. ‘Gender-sensitive procedures’ take into account the differing degrees of atrocities that men and women are subjected to in their country of origin and are then provided suitable protection. However, according to statistics from the Immigration, Integration and Housing Committee, Syrian male refugees are given the most robust protection for refugees, known as “convention status.” In contrast, women are given “temporary status.”
This leads to gender bias as Denmark has failed to identify vulnerable Syrian women who experienced gender-based violence in Syria, such as sexual violence, forced marriages, and honour crimes. The recent Danish refugee policy excludes Syrian men as they can be persecuted for eluding mandatory military services in Syria if repatriated. Hence, Denmark has given the strongest type of refugee protection to Syrian men. The EU has said that Denmark should take necessary measures to endorse gender equality. Denmark’s current stance leads to the violation of Article 1(b) of the Istanbul Convention, which requires states to eliminate all forms of discrimination against women.
Denmark does not recognise the present Syrian regime under Assad; therefore, it does not have diplomatic relations with Syria, consequently there is no repatriation system . Denmark cannot compel women refugees to return to Syria as this will lead to the infringement of Article 33(1) of the UN Refugee Convention, which explicitly outlines that no refugee should be forced to go to the country where one’s life or freedom is in peril irrespective of the fact whether a regime is recognised by the state providing asylum.
In lieu, Denmark has built departure centres for the women refugees where they face uncertain futures stuck in limbo, separated from their families, workplaces, and communities until deported. These arbitrary restrictions are imposed so that they are pressured to return ‘voluntarily’ to Syria. Yet, this additionally violates Article 19 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, to which Denmark is also a signatory. This article explicitly states that no individual should be sent to a country where they would face persecution. Asmaa al-Natour, a Syrian asylum seeker who is living in a departure centre in North Copenhagen, describes the centre as small, dilapidated and says it is neither suitable for humans nor animals to stay. The conditions of these centres are analogous to prisons, where women are not able to work, study, or even cook their own meals. This unwarranted restriction of physical liberty is an infringement of international law under Article 7(2)(e) and Article 7(2)(g) of the Rome Statute, which states that a person should not be subjected to mental and physical torture and should not be deprived of their basic fundamental rights. Furthermore, since women refugees in centres do not have access to work opportunities and education, their treatment constitutes a violation of Article 75 (right to work) and Article 76 (right to education) of the Denmark Constitution.
Denmark has proposed to give $30,000 to every Syrian refugee if they are ‘voluntarily’ willing to return to Syria. So far, 400 Syrians have accepted this offer. This has attracted criticism from the Danish public as they fear that this plan will undermine the safety and human rights of these refugees. Accordingly, this infringes Article 33(1) of the Refugee Convention, which encompasses cases of constructive refoulement. Constructive refoulement is seen when the state uses an indirect mechanism to persuade refugees to return to the country where their fundamental human rights are not respected.
Neils-Erik Hansen, a Danish lawyer, says that it comes down to a divide based on gender: ‘When I have a male client, I will send him right away to the Immigration Service and he will get asylum within three weeks. A female client will get rejected and we will have to take this case to the refugee board.’ If the refugee board also fails to give respite, then the courts can step in and overrule the government’s decision to annul the permits of refugees. However, this process can take some time. Until then, the lives and careers of refugees are put in a precarious state. According to current statistics, lawyers represent in 90% of the cases that involve women refugees and merely 10% of cases that involve male refugees. This further fortifies the kind of discrimination that women refugees are facing. Many women are advised to tie the knot with a permanent resident or with a Danish citizen if they wish to reside in Denmark. This, thus, also potentially violates Article 16(2) of Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states that an individual should marry a person of his/her choice only when granted free will and consent.
The irony of gender equality in Denmark
The Gender Equality Index published by European Institute states that Denmark is ranked second in the world for Gender Equality. However, the freedom of Syrian refugees in Denmark has been trampled and show little signs of abating. The leaders of Denmark should appreciate that every person’s personal, economic, and civil freedom is a fundamental right and a pivotal part of the country’s foundation. While on one hand, countries like Netherlands and Germany are granting permanent citizenship to Syrian refugees, on the other, Denmark has dug its grave by implementing such gender-biased policies. The Danish government has failed to distinguish between safety and security as they are two distinct aspects. Even though Damascus and Rif Damascus have taken giant steps in security, these regions are not safe enough to repatriate refugees, especially women refugees.
Archit Singhvi is a third-year student pursuing the course of B.A., LL.B. (Hons.) from Maharashtra National Law University, India. He has a keen interest in International Humanitarian Law and Constitutional Law.