CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 janvier 2026

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 2 February 2026   FIRST SECTION Application no. 34687/25 Y.M. against Sweden lodged on 4 November 2025 communicated on 13 January 2026 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 his Hazara ethnicity, his apostasy from Islam and conversion to Christianity, his sexual orientation, his political views, and his so-called “westernisation”. He also submits that the domestic authorities’ assessments of these risks were flawed and inadequate. Furthermore, relying on Article 13 of the Convention, the applicant complains that he was denied a re-examination of his asylum application based on his sexual orientation, and thereby not provided with an effective remedy. His request for an interim measure under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court was granted by the Court on 18 November 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 Article 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 sexual orientation, 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, including due to their sexual orientation; 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, 3.14.2 and 3.17)?   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.     Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy for his Convention complaints, as required by Article   13 of the Convention?