CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 novembre 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .s1DE04B9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 24 November 2025   FIRST SECTION Application no. 26092/25 A.M.R. against Sweden lodged on 18 August 2025 communicated on 3 November 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant, an Afghan national, requested asylum in Sweden. In several sets of proceedings, during the years from 2015 to 2025, the Swedish authorities refused his requests and ordered his deportation. The applicant complains that, if he were to be deported, he would face a real risk of being subjected to treatment in breach of Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention mainly owing to an earlier conflict in Afghanistan, his Hazara ethnicity, his apostasy from Islam and atheist beliefs, his political views, and his so-called “westernisation”. He also submits that the Swedish State failed to fulfil its procedural obligations under those Articles. Moreover, invoking Article 14 of the Convention, he complains that his illiteracy was not properly accommodated in the asylum proceedings, resulting in discriminatory treatment in comparison with asylum seekers without such functional limitations. His request for an interim measure under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court was granted by the Court on 10 September 2025.         QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     In the light of the applicant’s claims, the documents which have been submitted and relevant country information, would he face a risk of being subjected to treatment in breach of Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention if he were deported to Afghanistan? In particular, would he face such a risk on account of his Hazara origin, his religious and political beliefs, and his so-called “westernisation”, alone or in combination with any further circumstances, taking into consideration, inter alia , country information regarding the situation in Afghanistan for individuals of Hazara ethnicity; individuals considered to have committed apostasy; individuals perceived to have transgressed religious, moral and/or societal norms; and individuals perceived as influenced by foreign values (see, for example, UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Guidance Note on the International Protection Needs of People Fleeing Afghanistan (Update II) , September 2025, and European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA), Country Guidance: Afghanistan 2024, May 2024, Common analysis, sections 3.11, 3.12, 3.13 and 3.14.2)?   2.     Did the domestic authorities fulfil their procedural obligation to conduct an adequate examination of whether the applicant would face a real risk of death or ill ‑ treatment if he were deported to Afghanistan, as required by Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention?   3.     Has the applicant suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of his Convention rights, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention, in particular in view of his claim that his illiteracy was not properly accommodated in the domestic proceedings?