advance unedited version -CRC/C/86/D/83/2019 female genital mutilation.10 The State party states that female genital mutilation is generally prohibited in Somalia, including in al-Shabaab controlled areas and that, according to the available background material, al-Shabaab is against the practice and advises local communities not to practice female genital mutilation since it is not in line with Sharia law. 11 The State party also submits that the attitude toward female genital mutilation is changing, and many women have successfully chosen not to have their daughters undergo female genital mutilation.12 The State party submits that the report cited by the author indicates that it is possible for women to avoid having their daughters subjected to female genital mutilation depending on the mother’s personality and on whether she has necessary commitment. 13 Also, the report suggests that women who are heavily dependent on their communities and thereby might not be the strong ones to refuse the practice, are primarily women living in rural areas. 14 In this respect, the State party notes that the author originates from Ceelbuur, a town in the central Somali state of Galmudug, with a population of almost 80,000 and that no other information suggests that the author would be heavily dependent on her community and thus not strong enough to stand firm against female genital mutilation. Accordingly, the State party considers that, as the author and her husband oppose female genital mutilation, it had to be assumed that they would be able to resist the potential social pressure to have their daughter undergo female genital mutilation. 4.8 The State party contests the author’s claim that the Danish authorities had not asked questions about the risk relating to female genital mutilation during her interview with the Immigration Service prior to its decision of 27 March 2018 to revoke her and her children’s residence permits. In this regard, the State party submits that, on 29 November 2017, the author had been directly asked, more than once, whether she had any fears on behalf of her children. Despite repeated questions in this respect, the author had not mentioned female genital mutilation until she did before the Refugee Appeals Board on 8 March 2019. 4.9 As concerns the author’s claim that the Board did not speak to the author’s husband in order to know his opinion about female genital mutilation, the State party emphasizes that the author has clearly stated, including in her communication to the Committee, that her husband is against the practice. The State party adds that, according to the available background information, 15 a decision about female genital mutilation is ultimately the mother’s and that a child is most likely not to be subjected to the practice if at least one parent is against it. 4.10 Regarding the author’s claim that the Refugee Appeals Board made no reference to the Convention in its decision, the State party contends that, notwithstanding the lack of explicit reference to the Convention, the Board takes the Convention as well as other international treaties into account as a crucial element in examining asylum applications involving children. 4.11 With regard to the UNCHR letter dated 7 November 2016 urging States to refrain from returning individuals to Southern and Central Somalia, the State party submits that, in the present case and other similar cases, the Board has assessed the security situation in 10 11 12 13 14 15 See Danish Immigration Service, “Country of Origin Information: FGM/Female circumcision Background, numbers and tendencies” (January 2019); Danish Refugee Council, “Thematic Report: Somalia – The Security and Human Rights Situation in Al-Shabaab Controlled Areas” (July 2019); and Lifos, “Report: Somalia – Female circumcision” (April 2019). See Danish Refugee Council, “Thematic Report: Somalia – The Security and Human Rights Situation in Al-Shabaab Controlled Areas” (July 2019), p. 18. See Danish Immigration Service, “Country of Origin Information, FGM/Female circumcision Background, numbers and tendencies” (January 2019), p. 9. See Denmark, Ministry of Immigration, Integration and Housing, “South central Somalia: female genital mutilation/cutting: thematic paper — country of origin information for use in the asylum determination process” (January 2016), p. 8. Ibid, p. 9-10. It is stated that “the higher access to livelihood in urban centers may give women more independence from their community as compared to the rural areas, where women might be heavily dependent on their communities and therefore not strong enough to stand against the practice”. According to the State party’s observations of 1 November 2019 (p. 19), Lifos’s report, “Female Genital Mutilation” (April 2019) indicates that “if the parents are not of the same opinion, it is generally the mother who determines whether a daughter should undergo female genital mutilation”. 5