Changes in family reunification practices

Refugees Welcome has helped hundreds of refugees with family reunification. We have become experts in Eritrean cases in particular, and we have succeeded in changing the practice of the immigration authorities on several fronts and reuniting many families. See more about issues relevant to Eritrean cases here. Below is an overview of aspects where our assistance has led to real change in the area in general, with the most recent first:

Established family life with child
The most recent victory setting a precedent is from May 2023, which was in fact similar to a decision of the Immigration Appeals Board in December 2022 that we surprisingly won. For the first time it was established, in both cases, that there was a family life worthy of protection, even though their marriage certificate was not recognised, and the couple had not lived together for the 18 months normally required for cohabitants. The board assessed that the wedding ceremony, a joint child (which was planned) and joint support of the child were sufficient. Despite RW highlighting these factors repeatedly in numerous cases since 2014, they had previously been rejected. The couple in the latest case got married in Sudan in 2018 and had a child the same year. The father living in Denmark had visited his wife and son many times since, and we filed an appeal in August 2020.

Approval of marriage certificates from Ethiopia
Again in 2021, we successfully appealed a case which involved a matter of principle. This happened with the case of Robel and Kisanet, where the Immigration Service suddenly no longer recognised the marriage certificates that couples from Eritrea presented when they had been married in Ethiopia. After our repeated efforts, the decision was changed, and it became important for subsequent cases. However, new problems later arose in getting the Danish authorities to recognise the Ethiopian documents.
 
Military service to blame for separation
In 2019, we received another important decision in Bereket's case. The Immigration Appeals Board decided in our favour, namely, that the years-long separation between two partners was due to the man being called up for compulsory military service, and being therefore unable to live with his girlfriend at the other end of the country – and also unable to obtain leave to marry her, even though the couple had a child. The case had been processed for a period of exactly 4 years, and the family had been separated for 7 years.

Children prevented from leaving
In the autumn of 2018, RW managed to reopen a number of cases for Eritrean children who were stranded in Ethiopia. They were stranded because their parents living here had applied for family reunification, but the applications were rejected because the children were not able to leave Eritrea. When the border with Ethiopia was suddenly opened for a period of time, many of the children were able to travel there, but the Immigration Service said that they needed to apply again, which would involve another 10 months in processing time. After a joint letter from RW concerning a total of 12 families, the Danish authorities reopened almost all of the cases.

Son who turned 18 after application
In 2017, RW appealed against a decision regarding an Eritrean mother who applied for permission for her two sons to come to Denmark. The youngest was granted permission, but the eldest refused – on the grounds that he was now over 18 and that the family had chosen to separate. The Immigration Appeals Board ruled in our favour and overturned the decision in 2018, citing that both boys were under 18 at the time of the application.

Proof of continued contact
A Sudanese family reunification case ended up having great significance in a number of other cases, and succeeded in changing future practice on a very important point, especially for Eritrean cases. Read more about Waleed's case from 2017. The reason the decision was changed was that the agency had assessed the couple's relationship as voluntarily terminated – without asking questions or requesting documentation of ongoing contact. However, the break-up of their relationship was in fact a direct consequence of Waleed having to flee the country, and the family had been in daily contact and very distressed by the separation. This could be documented with screenshots of their internet communications.
 
As a direct consequence of Waleed's case, we got the Danish Immigration Service to reopen 4 out of 8 rejected cases that had similar facts, and shortly afterwards, 3 of them were granted permission. Member of Parliament Johanne Schmidt-Nielsen asked the relevant minister about Waleed's case, and we filed a subject access request to gain access to his file.

In the response, the Danish Immigration Service admitted that they did not obtain sufficient information, that they will attempt to identify similar cases of their own initiative, and that they will ensure they investigate these types of cases better in the future.
 
With respect to the Eritrean family reunification cases, we have also succeeded in getting the Immigration Service to allow the admittance of secondary documentation for marriages and with respect to contact between the parties while they are separated – often in the form of photos and screenshots from internet correspondence.

However, there are still many issues with family reunification that have not been resolved