A Russian national requested international protection in Denmark, claiming a fear of mobilization for the war in Ukraine and punishment for evading military service. He further stated that he feared imprisonment as he was an active member of the LGBTIQ community in Russia. The Danish Immigration Service rejected his application, and the Refugee Appeals Board ruled in appeal.

The Refugee Appeals Board upheld the Danish Immigration Service’s decision. The board stated that it could not assume that the applicant faced a real risk of being mobilised or forcibly conscripted into the war in Ukraine upon return to Russia. It first noted that mobilisation for the war in Ukraine was completed in the autumn of 2022. It further considered the information referred by the Danish Immigration Service, according to which Russia primarily deployed contract soldiers in Ukraine, and that recruitment was generally carried out on a voluntary basis; however, elements of persuasion and certain forms of coercion could have also been employed in the recruitment process. The board considered that the applicant did military service from 2016 to 2017 and left Russia in the winter of 2021/2022, having received a call for mobilisation via mailbox. Nonetheless calls for military service in Russia must be submitted in person, the board considered the Danish Immigration Service’s report "Russia: Conscription" published in March 2025, which indicated that, in practice, a conscription notice may be delivered through various means, including placement in a mailbox. Therefore, the board did not rule out that, as the applicant explained, a call for military service was delivered in this manner. However, it also noted that such call was not followed up by the authorities. Thus, the Refugee Appeals Board found that the applicant was not at risk of persecution due to the evasion of military service.

The board then considered the applicant’s sexual orientation and his activity on YouTube, which contained LGBTIQ related material, particularly focusing on a subculture associated within that community. It also noted that the applicant made few posts on other social platforms concerning the LGBTIQ community. The board emphasised that in November 2023, the LGBTIQ movement was considered by the Russian Supreme Court as extremist and individuals belonging to such community often faced stigma and discrimination. However, the board noted that being homosexual in Russia was still legal and that the applicant had not come into conflict with the Russian authorities because of his sexual orientation. Furthermore, it stated that there was no basis for assuming that the applicant’s activities could be considered extremist, as he had not been part of any LGBTIQ organisations in Russia and he had not carried out his activities in Denmark targeting the Russian population. Although the board found unclear whether the material posted by the applicant would be considered propaganda for so-called non-traditional sexual relations, which were prohibited in Russia, it found that the penalty envisioned by Russian authorities would be only a fine or a shorter custodial sentence. The board further noted that the applicant’s social media activities had limited visibility and reach, and that he had published content under a pseudonym. Additionally, it emphasised that the applicant was unable to provide evidence of any prosecution of individuals who had participated in his activities.