CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 27 avril 2026

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s97D80512 { margin-top:18pt; 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 } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .sB217F55C { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:7pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBCDC0FAF { margin-top:72pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .s2D726B78 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF74FAE9B { font-family:Arial; font-size:9.5pt } .s9252AC04 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } Published on 18 May 2026   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 13089/26 Abed Alrhman Ibrahim AL-BADRI against Denmark lodged on 20 March 2026 communicated on 27 April 2026 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant is an Iraqi national who was born in 1996 and lives in Middelfart. He entered Denmark in 2001 at the age of 5. By a final judgment of the Supreme Court of 27 November 2025, the applicant was convicted of attempted manslaughter. He was exempted from punishment because, at the time of committing the offence, he lacked criminal responsibility due to mental illness or an equivalent condition. Instead, he was placed in a psychiatric ward for an indefinite period of time. Moreover, he was issued an expulsion order combined with a 6-year re-entry ban. He complained that the order expelling him from Denmark was in violation of Article   8 of the Convention.       QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Having regard, in particular, to the fact that the applicant’s re ‑ entry ban was reduced by virtue of section   32(5) of the Aliens Act, would the order to expel him from the country with a 6-year re-entry ban be in breach of Article   8 of the Convention (see, notably, Sharafane v.   Denmark , no.   5199/23, 12   November 2024, and Al-Habeeb v.   Denmark , no.   14171/23, 12   November 2024)?   2.     Under the Danish legislation, notably section   16(7) of Executive Order no.   1545 of 12   December 2024, ( Udlændinges adgang til Danmark på grundlag af visum ), which requirements must the applicant fulfil in order to re ‑ enter Denmark, when the six ‑ year re-entry ban will expire?   3.     Can the Government provide any examples of circumstances where persons belonging to group 5, as set out in annex 2 to the said Executive Order, should be granted a visa under the new section   16(7) after having been expelled for a limited period of time, since otherwise it would be in breach of Article   8 of the Convention?