You are here
Home ›
News ›
2016 › Female genital mutilation ›
News
On 7 June 2016, the European Court of Human Rights delivered a judgment in the case of five Sudanese nationals. After having two asylum requests rejected in the Netherlands, the Sudanese family, consisting of father, mother, two daughters and a son lodged a third asylum request based on the claim that, if they were sent back to Sudan, their daughters would be subjected to Female Genital Mutilation (FGM).
This case relates to a national of Guinea who claimed asylum in Belgium in January 2012 based on a fear of persecution relating to the political activities of her husband, as well as on the basis of the fear that her daughter would be subjected to FGM by members of her husband’s family in Guinea.
Date:
Tuesday, January 19, 2016
The case of Sow v. Belgium relates to a national of Guinea who claimed asylum in Belgium as she had partially undergone FGM and claimed to be at risk of re-excision upon return. Her asylum claim was rejected by the Commissioner General for Refugees and Stateless Persons (CGRA) due to inconsistencies, a lack of credibility, and the failure to demonstrate a risk of being re-excised. The Council of Aliens’ Law Litigation (CALL) upheld this decision.
