Nævnet meddelte i oktober 2025 opholdstilladelse (B-status) til en mandlig statsborger fra Ukraine. Indrejst i 2023.
Flygtningenævnet udtalte:
”Ansøgeren er etnisk ukrainer og ortodoks kristen fra [vestligt beliggende region], Ukraine. Ansøgeren har ikke været medlem af politiske eller religiøse foreninger eller organisationer eller i øvrigt været politisk aktiv. Ansøgeren, der tidligere har været værnepligtig og kontraktansat soldat i det ukrainske militær, har som asylmotiv henvist til, at han ved en tilbagevenden til Ukraine frygter at blive mobiliseret til krigen af de ukrainske myndigheder. Ansøgeren har som asylmotiv videre henvist til, at han frygter at blive idømt straf og fængslet under forhold, der er i strid med menneskerettighederne, herunder EMRK artikel 3, såfremt han nægter at aftjene militærtjeneste. Ansøgeren har som asylmotiv yderligere henvist til, at han frygter de generelle forhold i Ukraine, herunder i ansøgerens hjemområde i [vestligt beliggende region]. Flygtningenævnet kan i det væsentlige lægge ansøgerens forklaring til grund. Flygtningenævnet lægger således til grund, at ansøgeren tidligere har været i den ukrainske hær [i en årrække i sidste halvdel af 2010’erne], hvor han startede som værnepligtig og derefter skrev kontrakt. Flygtningenævnet lægger endvidere til grund, at ansøgerens [familiemedlem] i Ukraine har modtaget flere breve til ansøgeren, hvor han indkaldes til militærtjeneste. Flygtningenævnet kan tillige lægge ansøgerens forklaring til grund om, at han ved en tilbagevenden til Ukraine vil kunne risikere at skulle udføre militærtjeneste, som han er blevet indkaldt til flere gange. Flygtningenævnet finder imidlertid i overensstemmelse med nævnets generelle praksis, at det af ansøgeren påberåbte asylmotiv om udførelse af militærtjeneste i det krigsramte Ukraine efter oplysningerne om baggrunden for krigen i Ukraine og mobiliseringen i kølvandet på den russiske invasion i landet den 24. februar 2022 ikke er et forhold, der i sig selv kan danne grundlag for opholdstilladelse i Danmark efter udlændingelovens § 7, stk. 1, om asyl efter Flygtningekonventionen eller opholdstilladelse efter udlændingelovens § 7, stk. 2, om beskyttelsesstatus. Det oplyste om forholdene for personer, der mobiliseres til krigen i Ukraine, kan ikke føre til en ændret vurdering. Ansøgeren har ikke i øvrigt anført grunde, der indebærer, at der er grundlag for at antage, at ansøgerens indkaldelse til militærtjeneste konkret er forbundet med forfølgelsesgrunde som nævnt i Flygtningekonventionen eller en velbegrundet frygt for overgreb omfattet af EMRK artikel 3.
Efter baggrundsoplysningerne lægges det til grund, at ansøgeren ved en tilbagevenden til Ukraine almindeligvis vil blive straffet, hvis han nægter at udføre militærtjeneste, og at ansøgeren også vil kunne blive straffet for unddragelse af at udføre militærtjeneste. De straffe, der efter baggrundsoplysningerne kan komme på tale, har imidlertid ikke et omfang og en karakter, der i sig selv indebærer, at ansøgeren ved en tilbagevenden til Ukraine vil være i reel risiko for at blive udsat for overgreb i strid med EMRK artikel 3. De hjemlede straffe kan ikke anses for uforholdsmæssige sammenlignet med sanktionerne for tilsvarende overtrædelser af dansk lovgivning. Der er herunder ikke grundlag for at antage, at en straf konkret vil være omfattet af forfølgelsesgrundene nævnt i Flygtningekonventionen, jf. udlændingelovens § 7, stk. 1, eller på det grundlag en velbegrundet frygt for overgreb i øvrigt som nævnt i EMRK artikel 3, jf. udlændingelovens § 7, stk. 2.
Afsoningsforholdene i ukrainske fængsler
For så vidt angår afsoningsforholdene i ukrainske fængsler, bemærker Flygtningenævnet, at Højesteret den 20. juni 2025 i sag 3/2025 om udlevering af en ukrainsk statsborger til strafforfølgning i Ukraine anfører følgende:
”Rapporter mv. om fængselsforholdene i Ukraine
FN’s Torturkomité afgav i maj 2025 afsluttende bemærkninger til den syvende periodiske rapport om Ukraines implementering af konventionen mod tortur og anden grusom, umenneskelig eller nedværdigende behandling eller straf. Det fremgår heraf bl.a.:
”17. The Committee notes the State party´s commitment and measures taken to abide by international humanitarian law and international human rights law in the context of the ongoing armed conflict and occupation, as well as the information provided by the delegation about the ministerial orders issued on the escort, treatment and protection of the prisoners of war, among other things. However, it is concerned by reports indicating:
…
(b) Acts of torture and ill-treatment and arbitrary detentions allegedly inflicted on the so-called “conflict-related detainees” charged with collaboration and other national security-related offences by law enforcement, notably the State Security Service officers, during apprehension or interrogation stage, including to extract confessions or information, which on some occasions took place in unofficial places in several regions, although it also notes the State party’s negation of the existence of such unofficial places; the reported lack of investigations into such allegations; and, the vague and overly broad definition of the crime of collaboration under article 111-1 of the Criminal Code. The Committee notes the existing draft law to amend this article, as informed by the delegation;
…
Conditions of detention
21. While taking note of the information provided by the State party regarding the adoption of the Penitentiary System Reform Strategy (2022–2026) and the establishment of the expert council for the penitentiary system, as well as the decrease in the overall prison population since the consideration of the State party’s previous periodic report, the Committee remains concerned about the underfunding of the penitentiary system, as well as the following longterm structural issues in the State party’s prisons:
(a) A high number of persons held in pretrial detention which contributes to the persistent overcrowding in pretrial detention facilities, even though the Committee notes the allocated funds to build a new pretrial detention facility in Kyiv, as informed by the delegation; In addition, poor and unsanitary material and living conditions have been reported in many old prison facilities;
…
Prison security and deaths in custody
23. While taking note of the formal abolishment of practice of “duty prisoners” (днювальний), inmates reportedly assigned by the prison administration to help maintaining order in prisons, the Committee is concerned about the reports indicating that the system is still functioning and that instances of abuse by prison staff prevail but go often unreported. Moreover, it observes with concern that injuries are generally recorded without documentation or assessment of their cause, although the Committee notes the efforts of the State party to include the Istanbul Protocol, as revised, in its strategy and improve the documentation of injuries form. It also notes with concern the reports indicating that investigations of reported cases of deaths in custody are ineffective and deficient, and that the mortality rate of detainees, including suicide rate, is significantly high.”
Den ukrainske parlamentariske kommissær for menneskerettigheder afgav den 10. marts 2025 en udtalelse til brug for den nævnte rapport. Af en uofficiel oversættelse af udtalelsen fremgår bl.a.:
”Regarding question 27 – on human rights violations in penitentiary institutions
In accordance with the current national legislation, namely part 2 of Article 11 of the Law of Ukraine "On Pre-Trial Detention" and part 1 of Article 115 of the Criminal Executive Code of Ukraine, the established norm of the area of chamber (residential) premises should be at least 2.5 m2 for persons taken into custody, and at least 4 m2 for convicts.
The results of visits by NPM groups during 2024 indicate that in most penitentiary institutions there remains a problematic situation with violations of the norms of the area per prisoner or convict.
…
Since 2014, at the initiative of the leadership of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, the activities of 41 penitentiary institutions (the total number at the beginning of 2014 is 182 institutions), convicted, have been gradually suspended, and transferred to institutions in other regions for further serving their sentences.
Thus, the excessive number of convicts in correctional colonies leads to violations of the norms of the area.
…
The administrations of penitentiary institutions still delegate functions and powers of the staff of penitentiary institutions to individual convicts, as provided for by the legal acts.
…
This practice exposes weaker convicts to the risk of ill-treatment and exploitation by convicts who hold the position of a day worker or senior day worker. Such delegation is essentially a relinquishment of responsibility for security and order, which lies with the administration of correctional facilities.
…
The most widespread human rights violation in penitentiary institutions is inadequate material and living conditions for prisoners and convicts. The visits revealed that most of the violations include: lack of privacy, limited access to fresh air and clean drinking water, non-compliance with temperature and lighting requirements in the premises where inmates are held.”
Center for Dokumentation og Indsats mod Ekstremisme, der hører under Udlændingestyrelsen, offentliggjorde i december 2024 sin seneste rapport om fængselsforholdene i Ukraine. Rapporten skal anvendes af de danske udlændingemyndigheder ved behandling af ansøgninger om asyl. Af rapporten fremgår bl.a.:
”Executive summary
Independent monitoring of Ukrainian prisons remains accessible to international and local human rights organisations, though some isolated restrictions apply.
The war has strained Ukraine’s already under-resourced prison system, impacting conditions, security and basic supplies. Since the full-scale invasion, Ukraine has lost 20 % of its prison population, with some facilities under Russian control or destroyed. To address shortages in manpower, a law now allows certain prisoners to enlist in the armed forces. As of mid-2024, over 3,000 prisoners have joined, with a government goal of enlisting around 10,000.
Ukraine has established new detention facilities, including prisoners of war (POW) camps and disciplinary battalions. …
Living conditions in Ukrainian pre-trial detention centres (SIZO) have not improved, with overcrowding, limited access to medical care and inadequate hygiene conditions persisting. The introduction of paid cells has provided some inmates with better accommodations, but the majority face substandard conditions, especially near conflict zones. Despite limited changes to legislation, detainees can remain in SIZO for prolonged periods. Issues of overcrowding have worsened with new categories of detainees such as military personnel. Vulnerable groups and women’s facilities have particular needs that remain unmet, although some positive steps like online legal consultations have been introduced in select locations.
Living conditions for sentenced prisoners in Ukraine are impacted by the war, with many facilities experiencing overcrowding, poor sanitation and deteriorating infrastructure. Access to healthcare remains inadequate, worsened by staff shortages, and prison labour often involves exploitation without fair compensation.
Instances of violence arise from poor conditions. Despite isolated improvements, overall prisoner access to meaningful activities, contact with the outside world and necessary healthcare remains limited, with issues such as the misuse of solitary confinement persisting.
Russian POWs in Ukraine have access to healthcare, hygiene and basic amenities, though some reports of ill-treatment exist.
…
There are reports of ill-treatment and torture against remand prisoners and sentenced prisoners committed by prison staff and so-called ‘administrative assistants’ from among the convicts.
Ukraine's judiciary faces issues with corruption, political pressure and undue trial delays, although recent reforms aim to improve judicial independence. While detainees have a right to legal support, access to quality legal aid is often hindered, particularly near frontline areas. Reports of torture to extract confessions exist but are not widespread. Prisoner transfers have raised concerns, with complaints about poor conditions, prolonged durations and in some cases humiliating treatment. Sources reported that impunity among prison staff is widespread.
…
2. Impact of the war on prisons in Ukraine
…
Even before the full-scale invasion, the Ukrainian penitentiary system was lacking resources. The war has significantly worsened prison conditions and weakened the State Penitentiary Service's ability to maintain security, safety and meet the basic needs of inmates. The MoJ stated that since February 2022, the country has lost 20 % of its prison population. Additionally, 12 prisons have reportedly come under Russian control, while three prisons have been destroyed. As a precautionary measure, 5,000 prisoners have been relocated from 12 prisons in the east to central and western regions of Ukraine.
…
7.2 The use of torture or coercion to obtain confessions
There have been accounts of law enforcement and military officials abusing, and in some cases torturing, detainees to extract confessions, often linked to suspected collaboration with Russia. …”
Europarådets Torturkomité offentliggjorde den 26. april 2024 en rapport til den ukrainske regering om komitéens besøg i Ukraine fra den 16. til den 27. oktober 2023. Det fremgår heraf bl.a.:
”EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This was the first visit to Ukraine by the CPT since the beginning of the full-scale military aggression by the Russian Federation in February 2022 and, from the outset, the Committee wishes to place on record the considerable efforts of the Ukrainian authorities to provide adequate conditions to persons deprived of their liberty in these extremely difficult times.
…
Prison establishments
…
However, the visit revealed that the longstanding phenomenon of informal prisoner hierarchy was still prevalent throughout the Ukrainian prison system. In this context, the situation of persons considered to be “humiliated”, that is, those who find themselves at the bottom of this hierarchy, remains a matter of serious concern to the CPT. These prisoners continued to be rejected by the mainstream prison population and were required by the hierarchy’s “code of conduct” to comply with a range of restrictions (for example, to avoid any physical contact with other prisoners, not to use communal facilities, etc.). Moreover, such prisoners were frequently compelled to perform “dirty” work (such as cleaning toilets and collecting rubbish) for which they were not paid.
In some of the prisons visited, the general policy was to separate this category of prisoners from the general inmate population for protection reasons, grouping them together in dedicated cells. In some other establishments, however, no such policy was in place; as a result, the “low caste” prisoners were often exposed to a risk of violence, intimidation and exploitation by their cellmates. …
…
I. INTRODUCTION
…
C. National Preventive Mechanism
…
10. Before setting out the findings of the visit, the CPT would like to stress that it is mindful of the tremendous challenges faced by the Ukrainian authorities in light of the full-scale aggression by the Russian Federation. The Committee wishes to place on record the authorities’ considerable efforts to provide adequate conditions to persons deprived of their liberty in these extremely difficult times.
…
B. Prison establishments
1. Preliminary remarks
36. The CPT welcomes the continued efforts made by the Ukrainian authorities over the past 25 years to reduce the country’s prison population. ...
However, the CPT noted that the proportion of remand prisoners had remained high, amounting to some 36% of the total prison population. The Committee is aware that this situation is at least partially related to the acute shortage of judges in Ukraine in the context of the ongoing judicial reforms, which has resulted in a considerable backlog of criminal cases and lengthy court proceedings. As will be described in more detail later in this report (see paragraphs 49, 50, 51 and 53), at the time of the visit, many remand prisoners continued to be held in overcrowded conditions for prolonged periods of time.
The CPT recommends that the Ukrainian authorities pursue their efforts to reduce the prison population and thereby combat overcrowding in penitentiary establishments. In particular, steps should be taken to ensure a more restrictive approach to the use of remand in custody by setting strict limits on its use and encouraging a greater use of alternative noncustodial measures, taking due account of the relevant recommendations of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. …
37. The CPT noted with interest that a new ‘Penitentiary Reform Strategy until 2026’ had been approved by the Ukrainian Government in December 2022. Recognising the importance of relevant international norms and standards in this area, including CPT standards, the Strategy envisages a series of measures – including of a legislative nature – aimed at increasing the efficiency of the penal enforcement system and defines a number of priority objectives, such as:
- providing appropriate conditions of detention in penitentiary establishments (including by gradual transition from large-capacity dormitories to smaller living units);
- ensuring the safety of persons held in penitentiary establishments and preventing all forms of ill-treatment, and guaranteeing good order and security within such establishments;
- improving the provision of healthcare to prisoners;
…
2. Ill-treatment
40. The delegation received no allegations of recent ill-treatment by staff in any of the prison establishments visited. The vast majority of the prisoners interviewed stated that staff members treated them correctly.
41. Further, physical violence between prisoners did not seem to be a major problem in most of the establishments visited. …
…
47. In its previous visit reports, the CPT called upon the Ukrainian authorities to put an end to the practice of employing inmates as “duty prisoners” (днювальний), who were assigned supervisory tasks over other prisoners. The Committee was therefore concerned to note during the 2023 visit that this practice had remained in place.
…
3. Conditions of detention of the general prison population
a. material conditions
48. Most of the prisons visited by the delegation in the course of the 2023 visit were located in old buildings which had not undergone any major refurbishment for years, if not decades. As a result, the bulk of the prisoner accommodation in these establishments was in a poor state of repair. Having almost no budget allocations for even minor repairs, the management of the prisons were seeking financial support from alternative sources – such as charities, funds received from paid cells (see paragraph 59) or prisoner’s own resources – to finance sporadic renovations.
…
In light of the remarks in paragraphs 49 to 57 above, the CPT calls upon the Ukrainian authorities to take the necessary measures to improve material conditions of detention in the
prisons visited, in order to ensure that:
- occupancy rates are reduced so that all multiple-occupancy cells offer at least 4 m2 of living space per prisoner (not counting the area taken up by in-cell toilets). Reference is also made in this regard to the recommendation in paragraph 38;
- all prisoner accommodation areas, including sanitary facilities, are kept in an adequate state of repair and hygiene and are disinfested on a regular and frequent basis;
- cells have sufficient access to natural light and ventilation and in-cell sanitary facilities are fully partitioned (i.e. from floor to ceiling);
- all prisoners are provided with appropriate bedding and have access to a shower at least twice a week.”
Det amerikanske udenrigsministerium (United States Department of State) offentliggjorde den 22. april 2024 en landerapport om menneskerettighederne i Ukraine i 2023, hvoraf fremgår bl.a.:
”Executive Summary
…
There were also significant human rights issues involving Ukrainian government officials, although not comparable to the scope of Russia’s abuses, which included credible reports of: enforced disappearance; torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; harsh and lifethreatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest or detention; serious problems with the independence of the judiciary; … The government often did not take adequate steps to identify and punish officials who may have committed abuses.
…
c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses
Although the constitution and law prohibited torture and other cruel and unusual punishment, there were reports law enforcement authorities engaged in such abuse. There were reports law enforcement and military officials abused and, at times, tortured persons in custody to obtain confessions, usually related to alleged collaboration with Russia.
…
Prison and Detention Center Conditions
Prison and detention center conditions remained poor and at times posed a serious threat to the life and health of prisoners. Physical abuse, lack of proper medical care and nutrition, poor sanitation, and lack of adequate light were persistent problems.
Inmates reported authorities and so-called assistants from the inmate population used cruel and degrading treatment, as well as physical and sexual violence.”
Europa-Kommissionen offentliggjorde den 8. november 2023 en landerapport om Ukraine, hvoraf fremgår bl.a.:
”On the prevention of torture and ill treatment, in 2022 Ukraine amended relevant legislation by changing approaches to the use of forced feeding of convicts and detainees, strengthening responsibility for acts of torture and introducing a mechanism for the conditional early release for people sentenced to life imprisonment. Despite these legal improvements, torture and ill treatment remains a systemic feature of Ukraine’s prison system. In addition, the main recommendations of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture issued in its 2020 report have not been addressed. These covered among others poor material conditions of detention and the need to transfer medical care in prison to the general health system and should be addressed.
…
… The ineffective investigation into allegations of torture and cases of obstruction of justice are rooted among others in a general culture of mutual protection of law enforcement officers within the criminal justice system.
…
The prison system and detention centres remain an issue of concern. The prison population has fallen sharply in recent years, from 60 621 in 2017 to 42 694 in December 2022. Despite this positive trend, most of the long-standing problems identified by the European Court of Human Rights, the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers and the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture remain. The issues are primarily linked to the material conditions of detention, very poor healthcare services, the use of detainees for prison duties and the widespread use of violence by guards. The penitentiary system was already under-resourced before Russia’s war of aggression and since many facilities have been badly damaged and some completely destroyed, complicating also the provision of basic services. Despite the national strategy on human rights of 2021 and the multiannual strategy for reforming the prison system of 2022, the key challenges facing it have not been addressed. The poor detention conditions in Ukraine have at times served as grounds for foreign courts to refuse extradition requests from Ukrainian institutions. This undermines Ukraine’s fight against serious crime, including corruption and organised crime.”
(…)”
Højesteret foretog herefter følgende vurdering:
”Af en række rapporter mv. om fængselsforhold i Ukraine fremgår bl.a., at det ukrainske fængselsvæsen har haft et langvarigt strukturelt problem med vedvarende overbelægning navnlig i arresthuse, at de krav, der følger af den ukrainske lovgivning om personligt areal, i mange institutioner ikke overholdes, at fængselsforholdene til tider udgør en alvorlig trussel mod de indsattes liv og helbred, og at den verserende krig mod Rusland væsentligt har forværret fængselsforholdene.
Det fremgår imidlertid også af rapporterne, at de ukrainske myndigheder på trods af krigen har udfoldet betydelige bestræbelser på at sikre passende forhold for frihedsberøvede personer, at de ukrainske myndigheder har fortsat indsatsen for at reducere antallet af frihedsberøvede personer, at der er en igangværende reform af fængselsvæsenet, og at der er oprettet et ekspertudvalg vedrørende fængselsvæsenet.
Hertil kommer, at de ukrainske myndigheder har oplyst, at der i november 2023 er vedtaget en ny lov om udleverede personers rettigheder og friheder, og at der i de fængsler, hvor S1 eventuelt vil skulle afsone, pågår arbejde med at etablere særlige afsnit, hvor udleverede personer skal afsone.
Højesteret finder på baggrund af karakteren og indholdet af de afgivne garantier sammenholdt med S1s individuelle forhold, at der på trods af rapporterne om fængselsforholdene i Ukraine ikke er en reel risiko for, at han vil blive udsat for forhold i strid med Menneskerettighedskonventionens artikel 3.
Herefter, og da andre forhold ikke kan begrunde, at S1 nægtes udleveret til Ukraine, stadfæster Højesteret byrettens kendelse, sådan at anklagemyndighedens anmodning om udlevering af S1 til Ukraine tages til følge.
(…)”
Flygtningenævnet kan på baggrund af de foreliggende oplysninger om de generelle afsoningsforhold i Ukraine ikke afvise, at der er en reel risiko for, at ansøgeren vil blive udsat for forhold i strid med EMRK artikel 3 i forbindelse med en afsoning som militærnægter. Herefter meddeles ansøgeren opholdstilladelse i medfør af udlændingelovens § 7, stk. 2.”
Løbenummer: Ukra/2025/12/ysn
