Search
document

Document text Analytics

DRAGICEVIC v. SWEDEN

Doc ref: 27383/95 • ECHR ID: 001-2245

Document date: July 6, 1995

Inbound citations: 0
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 0

DRAGICEVIC v. SWEDEN

Doc ref: 27383/95 • ECHR ID: 001-2245

Document date: July 6, 1995

Cited paragraphs only

Application No. 27383/95

by Sveto and Mirjana DRAGICEVIC

against Sweden

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on

6 July 1995, the following members being present:

MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President

H. DANELIUS

C.L. ROZAKIS

E. BUSUTTIL

G. JÖRUNDSSON

S. TRECHSEL

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

J.-C. SOYER

H.G. SCHERMERS

Mrs. G.H. THUNE

Mr. F. MARTINEZ

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. L. LOUCAIDES

J.-C. GEUS

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

B. MARXER

G.B. REFFI

M.A. NOWICKI

I. CABRAL BARRETO

B. CONFORTI

N. BRATZA

I. BÉKÉS

J. MUCHA

E. KONSTANTINOV

D. SVÁBY

G. RESS

A. PERENIC

C. BÎRSAN

Mr. H.C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection

of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 1 March 1995 by

Sveto and Mirjana Dragicevic against Sweden and registered on

23 May 1995 under file No. 27383/95;

Having regard to the reports provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules

of Procedure of the Commission;

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent

Government on 2 June 1995 and the observations in reply submitted by

the applicant on 24 June 1995;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicants, husband and wife, were born in 1959 and 1963

respectively. They are Serbs and were citizens of former Yugoslavia.

They lived, however, in Croatia. At present, they reside at

Örkelljunga, Sweden. They have two children, born in 1989 and 1991.

On 26 February 1993 the family arrived in Sweden and applied for

asylum. On 30 August 1994 the National Immigration Board (Statens

invandrarverk) rejected the application and ordered the applicants'

deportation to Croatia. The decision was upheld by the Aliens Appeals

Board (Utlänningsnämnden) on 19 April 1995.

After the applicants had lodged a new application with the Aliens

Appeals Board, the Board, by decision of 26 May 1995, granted the

applicants and their children temporary residence permits until

1 December 1995 on humanitarian grounds. The Board referred to a

Government decision of 5 May 1995, according to which the prevailing

situation in Croatia rendered the expulsion of asylum seekers to

Croatia impossible.

Before the Commission, the applicants claim that the husband may

be executed in Croatia for draft evasion and that the family will be

persecuted and discriminated against because of their Serbian

background. They further claim that their old Yugoslav passports have

expired and that they cannot get new Croatian passports, for which

reason they cannot return to Croatia. They invoke Articles 2, 3, 8 and

14 of the Convention and Articles 2-4 of Protocol No. 4.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 1 March 1995 and registered on

23 May 1995.

On 23 May 1995 the Commission decided, pursuant to Rule 36 of the

Commission's Rules of Procedure, to indicate to the respondent

Government that it was desirable in the interest of the parties and the

proper conduct of the proceedings not to return the applicants to

Croatia until the Commission had had an opportunity to examine the

application.

The Commission further decided, pursuant to Rule 48 para. 2 (b),

to bring the application to the notice of the respondent Government and

to invite them to submit written observations on the admissibility and

merits.

The Government's observations were submitted on 2 June 1995. The

Government informed the Commission of the Aliens Appeals Board's

decision to grant the applicants and their children temporary residence

permits until 1 December 1995.

The applicants' observations in reply were submitted on

24 June 1995.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

As the applicants have been granted temporary residence permits,

the Commission finds, in accordance with Article 30 para. 1 (c) of the

Convention, that it is no longer justified to continue the examination

of the application. It follows that the application should be struck

off the Commission's list of cases.

The Commission, however, notes that it may, under Article 30

para. 3 of the Convention, decide to restore the application to its

list of cases if it considers that the circumstances justify such a

course.

For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES.

Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission

(H.C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant