Kirsty Brimelow QC and Harriet Johnson represent Danish Rape victim in complaint to the European Court of Human Rights

Kirsty Brimelow QC and Harriet Johnson are representing Kirstine Holst, the Danish journalist and human rights activist, who has lodged an application to the European Court of Human Rights against Denmark complaining of the violations of her rights:

1. to be protected from torture with its law of the offence of rape:

a. requiring violence or threats of violence to be carried out against the complainant rather than non-consent being sufficient to comprise the offence of rape;

2. to be protected inhuman, degrading treatment including:

a. repeating her allegations to numerous police officers;

b. being told by the police when Ms. Holst reported the rape that these allegations

”rarely go anywhere”

c. at time of attempted report being reminded by the police that there is a criminal penalty if she is lying

3. to have her allegation of rape properly investigated by police and State lawyers including:

a. failure to secure or investigate the crime scene meaning that evidence was lost

b. Failure to forensically examine Ms. Holst’s nightdress, or panties, despite the fact that her nightdress had visible blood stains on it and that both were provided immediately to police by Ms. Holst;

c. then failure by prosecution lawyers to obtain this examination d. failure to interview the suspect within a reasonable time

e. failure to take photographs of bruising to Ms. Holst or to provide the photographs she provided to the forensic report writer

4. to have her privacy protected

a. questioning on personal irrelevant matters

On 18th August 2017 Ms. Holst was raped by a man she considered a friend in his apartment in Copenhagen. Ms. Holst went to the hospital and reported the rape 2 days later to police and trusted that justice would prevail.

Ms. Holst’s provided full and willing cooperation with the investigation, the police investigation was so seriously flawed as to constitute a breach of Ms. Holst’s right to freedom from torture. The failings in the police investigation were multiple and egregious.

Ms. Holst’s application to the European Court of Human Rights encompasses not just a challenge to the way that the police in her case failed to properly investigate her rape, but also a challenge to the legal definition of rape in Denmark. Ms. Holst’s application relies in part on the ruling in MC v Bulgaria (2005) 40 EHRR 20, in which the ECtHR ruled:

“any rigid approach to the prosecution of sexual offences, such as requiring proof of physical resistance in all circumstances, risks leaving certain types of rape unpunished and thus jeopardising the effective protection of the individual’s sexual autonomy. In accordance with contemporary standards and trends in that area, the member States’ positive obligations under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention must be seen as requiring the penalisation and effective prosecution of any non-consensual act, including in the absence of any physical resistance by the victim.”

Ms. Holst will seek a ruling that the standards of criminal law in Denmark requiring a victim of rape to prove that physical violence, threat or coercion was used (or that s/he was unable to resist) as such amounts to a violation of her rights under Articles 3 and 8 of the European Convention.

Ms. Holst said:

“I hope that the Court will take the case and make a principled verdict that will help to ensure that rape victims get their cases handled with greater competence and respect for human rights. I also hope that the Director of Prosecution, who has refused to investigate all the possible evidence in my case despite being aware of the importance, will reconsider reopening my case in order to ensure that this case, and my testimony, is carefully investigated and that my human rights are respected.”

Ms. Holst is also represented by Helle Hald, attorney at law at Sirius Advokater.

Kirsty Brimelow QC said: