Expulsion of homicide offender with no ties to other countries

Case no. 28/2023
Judgment delivered on 25 August 2023

The Prosecution Service
vs.
T

T, a 25-year-old stateless Palestinian, had been convicted of homicide committed with prior agreement and planning with an accomplice. The Court held that T was not punishable due to diminished criminal culpability because of mental illness or the like. The High Court expelled him from Denmark with a permanent entry ban. The issue before the Supreme Court only concerned the expulsion order.

The Supreme Court concluded, among other things, that expulsion would amount to a restriction of T’s right to respect for his private life or family under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, for which reason the issue would have to be resolved based on a proportionality assessment.

In addition to now being convicted of homicide, T had several other convictions, including most recently for, among other things, robbery, and an expulsion warning had been issued against him.

In its proportionality assessment, the Court took account of the fact that T had been exempted from punishment due to diminished criminal culpability because of mental illness or the like. The Supreme Court also noted that, despite his mental illness, T had been capable of committing the homicide with prior agreement and planning with an accomplice.

T was born and raised in Denmark where he had also attended school. He had no education and had received cash benefits since he turned 18. H had very little contact with his four-year-old son who lived with his mother. T’s mother and siblings also lived in Denmark. He had no real ties to other countries than Denmark.

The Supreme Court held that neither the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights nor the legislative history behind the Danish Aliens Act gave any indication that expulsion required a certain degree of ties to another country.

Based on an overall assessment, the Supreme Court thus ruled that it would not amount to a disproportionate measure to expel T to prevent disorder or crime. However, as a permanent entry ban would be disproportionate, the Supreme Court reduced the entry ban to six years.