'Westernisation' and ethnicity in Afghan asylum claims: Free Movement article examines ECtHR Judgment (23 April 2026)

Jamie Bell, a solicitor in our Immigration department, has examined a significant European Court of Human Rights judgment concerning ‘westernisation’ and ethnicity in relation to Afghan asylum seekers in Free Movement.

In his article, Jamie discusses the judgment in DM v Sweden (Application no. 32694/23, 26 March 2026), the first time the court has examined the situation in Afghanistan following the Taliban's return to power in August 2021.

The Case

DM, is a Hazara Afghan national who originally sought asylum in Sweden in 2015. DM argued that he faced risk on return to Afghanistan as a member of a historically persecuted ethnic group, as a "westernised" individual, and as an alleged apostate. His claim was initially rejected by the Swedish authorities and again on appeal before a Rule 39 interim measure was granted, preventing his deportation pending the court's ruling.

Key Legal Issues

The article outlines how the court considered both DM's individual circumstances and the general conditions in Afghanistan, including:

• Whether Hazara ethnicity alone is sufficient to meet the Article 3 threshold
• The significance of "westernisation" as a risk factor, including DM's lifestyle, behaviours and attitudes developed during 10 years of living in Sweden
• The requirement for member states to assess asylum claims on a cumulative basis, considering all relevant individual factors together rather than in isolation

The Court's Conclusions

The court found that while the general situation in Afghanistan does not automatically breach Article 3, the human rights situation is "dire". Taking DM's Hazara ethnicity, his westernised lifestyle and his inability to conceal key aspects of his identity cumulatively, the court concluded that his deportation would violate Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Looking Ahead

Although the ruling binds only Sweden, the decision carries wider significance for European states assessing Afghan asylum claims. The judgment rejects blanket assumptions about safety in Afghanistan and is particularly relevant given upcoming Upper Tribunal country guidance on westernisation in the case of MA (UI-2024-001603).

Read the Full Article

To read the complete article at Free Movement, click here.

About Jamie Bell

Jamie Bell is a solicitor in the Public Law and Immigration Department at Duncan Lewis, with a particular focus on advising and representing Afghan asylum seekers.

About Duncan Lewis Solicitors

Duncan Lewis is one of the UK’s leading legal aid providers, which is multi award-winning and renowned for its exceptional legal services and commitment to justice. The company employs a team of highly skilled solicitors offering top-tier representation in 25 fields of law, and ranked as top tier by the Chambers and the Legal 500 legal guides, and as one of the top 250 law firms in the country by the Times. Duncan Lewis was crowned Law Firm of the Year at the Modern Law Awards 2023, further establishing its credentials as one of the leading law firms in the UK.

The firm’s Immigration and Public Law team is particularly renowned for handling complex and high profile cases involving human rights and asylum seekers. With landmark successes in cases such as Brook House, the Rwanda Challenge, and Manston House, Duncan Lewis continues to provide unparalleled legal representation, ensuring justice for the most vulnerable.