Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

K.D. v. FINLAND

Doc ref: 23065/93 • ECHR ID: 001-2566

Document date: March 10, 1994

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 8

K.D. v. FINLAND

Doc ref: 23065/93 • ECHR ID: 001-2566

Document date: March 10, 1994

Cited paragraphs only



                      AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

                      Application No. 23065/93

                      by K.D.

                      against Finland

      The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on

10 March 1994, the following members being present:

      MM.  C.A. NØRGAARD, President

           S. TRECHSEL

           A. WEITZEL

           F. ERMACORA

           E. BUSUTTIL

           G. JÖRUNDSSON

           A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

           J.-C. SOYER

           H.G. SCHERMERS

           H. DANELIUS

      Mrs. G.H. THUNE

      MM.  F. MARTINEZ

           C.L. ROZAKIS

      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

      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 24 November 1993

by K.D. against Finland and registered on 9 December 1993 under file

No. 23065/93;

      Having regard to :

-     reports provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of the

      Commission;

-     the observations submitted by the respondent Government on

      10 February and 7 March 1994 and the observations in reply

      submitted by the applicant on 15 and 23 February 1994;

      Having deliberated;

      Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

      The applicant is a Kosovo-Albanian Muslim, born in 1972, and a

citizen of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, currently imprisoned in

Pozarevac, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Before the Commission

she was initially represented by Mr. Sami Basota, and subsequently by

her sister, Ms. A. D., both resident in Kerava, Finland.

      The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be

summarised as follows.

Particular circumstances of the case

      According to the applicant, she was, on 28 July 1990, wounded by

Serbian soldiers in Prizren, Kosovo, for having been politically active

in the Kosova movement. She claims to have been hit by two bullets,

injured by a knife cut and raped by four Serbian soldiers. Having

reported the rape to the police, the applicant was brought to a

hospital for examination. The incident has been reported in a local

daily newspaper called "Rilindja" on 1 August 1990. The doctor who

examined the applicant confirmed to the newspaper that the applicant's

vagina had been filled with stones and other objects. Following the

hospital examination the applicant was apparently arrested and

imprisoned for over two years without any trial. It is further alleged

that she was subjected to torture during her detention.

      After her arrest, the applicant's family (her parents and three

siblings born in 1939, 1950, 1974, 1976 and 1980, respectively)

received no news about her and left the country in 1992, assuming that

she had been killed. They entered Finland on 30 June 1992 and requested

asylum. On 12 February 1993 they were granted residence permits for

weighty humanitarian reasons until 12 February 1994, pursuant to the

1993 Act on the Exceptional Examination of Asylum Requests by Certain

Citizens of former Yugoslavia (laki 14/93 eräiden entisen Jugoslavian

kansalaisten tekemien turvapaikkahakemusten poikkeuskäsittelystä, lag

14/93 om särbehandling av asylansökningar som gjorts av vissa

medborgare i det forna Jugoslavien). It appears that their permits have

subsequently been extended pursuant to instructions issued by the

Ministry of the Interior (sisäasiainministeriö, inrikesministeriet) on

10 January 1994.

      Apparently after having escaped from detention, the applicant

entered Turkey in 1992 or early 1993. In a request lodged with the

Finnish Consulate in Istanbul on 12 April 1993 the applicant requested

a two month visa in order to visit her family. This was refused by the

Consulate on 16 April 1993.

      Having been contacted by the applicant in June 1993, the

applicant's family on 26 July 1993 requested that the applicant be

granted a residence permit on humanitarian grounds. The request was

supported by the Social Welfare Board (sosiaali- ja terveyslautakunta,

social- och hälsovårdsnämnden) of Kerava on 28 July 1993.

      On 29 July 1993 the County Administrative Board (lääninhallitus,

länsstyrelsen) of Uusimaa requested the Aliens' Centre (ulkomaalais-

keskus, utlänningscentralen) of the Ministry of the Interior to take

urgent measures in order to permit the applicant to join her family.

The County Administrative Board considered that, although the applicant

did not fulfil the criteria for family unification, strong humanitarian

reasons supported the granting of a residence permit.

      The applicant returned to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in

the summer of 1993, but was again arrested. Her passport was seized.

On 5 October 1993, however, the applicant re-entered Turkey and

immediately contacted the Aliens' Police. It appears, however, that she

did not lodge any formal request for permission to stay in Turkey.

      On 13 October 1993 she requested a residence permit in Finland

for the purpose of joining her family. This request was considered to

include a new request for a visa to enter Finland. When filing her

request the applicant was questioned by Consulate staff about her

background. She then referred to the incidents in 1990 and her

imprisonment, as well as to her arrest and the seizure of her passport

in 1993.

      The Consulate conveyed the request to the Aliens' Centre for an

opinion, which stated

      (translation from Finnish):

      "The Ministry ... cannot give a favourable opinion in

      regard to [the applicant's] request, as [she] has reached

      the age of majority and does not without particular reasons

      fulfil the criteria for the unification of [family

      members]. If particular reasons are later invoked, precise

      documentary evidence is required of her circumstances after

      she stopped living with her family. If [the applicant]

      fears persecution in her home country, she can turn to the

      Turkish authorities or to the ... office of the United

      Nations High Commissioner for Refugees."

      The request was refused by the Consulate on 27 October 1993,

having been considered under Section 18, para. 1 of the 1991 Aliens Act

(ulkomaalaislaki 378/91, utlänningslag 378/91). This decision was also

considered to cover the applicant's family's request of 26 July 1993.

      On 29 November 1993 the applicant was expelled from Turkey to

Bulgaria, from where she was returned to the Federal Republic of

Yugoslavia. It appears that she lodged no formal request for permission

to stay in Bulgaria.

      Following her return to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia the

applicant was again imprisoned in the prison "Z.K.P.D." in Pozarevac,

Serbia.

       Having been informed of the applicant's current imprisonment,

the Ministry for Foreign Affairs on 25 February 1994 ordered the

Finnish Embassy in Belgrade to issue her with a residence permit. On

the same day the Aliens' Centre of the Ministry of the Interior

notified the Embassy of its approval of the granting of a residence

permit to the applicant.

      On 1 March 1994 the Ministry for Foreign Affairs was informed by

the Finnish Embassy that, according to authorities of the Federal

Republic of Yugoslavia, the applicant had been imprisoned on

8 January 1994, having been convicted of robbery or theft. The Embassy

had further been informed that she will be released at the latest on

8 January 1995, on which date she will be free to go to Finland. In the

light of this information the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs

requested the Embassy to obtain further information from the Ministry

of Justice of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia concerning the

applicant's conviction and release.

Relevant domestic law

      (a)   General provisions

      Chapter 1, section 1, subsection 1, of the 1991 Finnish Aliens

Act (ulkomaalaislaki 378/91, utlänningslag 378/91) provides that this

Act, any provisions of a lower rank and international treaties by which

Finland is bound shall be applied to aliens' entry into and departure

from Finland. The preparatory works to the Act underline the binding

character of applicable human rights treaties and emphasise that these

treaties shall be duly considered in the application of domestic law

(Bill No. 47/90, p. 7).

      Under Sections 17 and 18 of the Aliens Act a temporary residence

permit may be granted by a Finnish diplomatic representation or

consulate, inter alia, if a close relative of the alien is resident in

Finland, if the alien has another tie to Finland or if a weighty

humanitarian reason or other particular circumstances warrant the

granting of such a permit (Section 18, paras. 1 and 4).

      According to a circular issued by the Ministry for Foreign

Affairs on 9 September 1993, the Ministry of the Interior may on

request issue a residence permit to an alien residing abroad, provided

he is a family member of an alien who has been granted asylum or a

residence permit in Finland for protective or humanitarian reasons.

      An alien who considers that his rights have been infringed by a

decision made by the Ministry of the Interior regarding a refusal of

entry, a deportation, a prohibition to enter or leave the country, a

revocation of an alien's passport, refugee travel document, visa or a

residence permit, or a refusal to issue a permanent residence permit,

may appeal to the Supreme Administrative Court (korkein hallinto-

oikeus, högsta förvaltningsdomstolen) within fourteen days of

notification of the decision. A refusal of a fixed-term residence

permit which has been requested outside Finland is not subject to

appeal (Chapter 8, Section 58, as amended by Act no. 639/93, and

Section 59).

      (b)  Special legislation concerning certain asylum seekers

      The 1993 Act on the Exceptional Examination of Asylum Requests

by Certain Citizens of former Yugoslavia, which entered into force on

20 January 1993, is applicable to those citizens of "former Yugoslavia"

who have entered Finland and requested asylum there prior to

22 July 1992, but whose requests had not been decided on that date. The

Act prescribes that the asylum requests shall not be examined for the

time being and that the persons to whom the Act applies shall be given

a residence permit. An exception is made for persons who have committed

certain offences.

      Under instructions issued on 10 January 1994 by the Ministry of

the Interior those who have been granted residence permits in

accordance with the 1993 Act shall, in view of their ties to Finland

and in the absence of particularly weighty reasons, have their permits

extended for another year. Exceptions are only to be made if the person

has committed certain crimes.

      (c)  Remedies under domestic law

      According to Section 93, subsection 2, of the 1919 Constitution

Act (Suomen hallitusmuoto 94/19, Regeringsform för Finland 94/19),

anyone who has suffered an infringement of his rights, or damage,

through an illegal act or negligence on the part of a civil servant,

is entitled to demand that the civil servant be convicted and held

liable for damages, or to report him for the purposes of having charges

brought against him. Under the 1974 Tort Liability Act (vahingon-

korvauslaki 412/74, skadeståndslag 412/74), proceedings for damages may

also be instituted against the State for the actions of civil servants

(Chapters 3 and 4).

      Petitions may be lodged with the Parliamentary Ombudsman

(eduskunnan oikeusasiamies, riksdagens justitieombudsman) and the

Chancellor of Justice of the Council of State (valtioneuvoston

oikeuskansleri, justitiekanslern i statsrådet). Both can order charges

to be brought against an official.

      (d)  The Aliens' Ombudsman

      The 1991 Act on the Aliens' Ombudsman (laki 446/91 ulkomaalais-

valtuutetusta, lag 446/91 om utlänningsombudsmannen) prescribes that

the Ombudsman shall be heard in matters specified in the Aliens Act.

Under that Act the Ombudsman shall be heard by the Ministry of the

Interior in regard to asylum requests and deportations (Chapter 5,

Section 33, and Chapter 6, Section 42).

COMPLAINTS

      The applicant complains of an alleged lack of respect for her

family life shown by Finnish authorities, as she was not allowed to be

reunited with her family in Finland. She invokes Articles 2, 3, 4, 5,

6, 8 and 13 of the Convention, Article 2 of Protocol No. 1, Articles

1, 2 and 4 of Protocol No. 4, as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 7.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

      The application was introduced on 24 November 1993 and registered

on 9 December 1993.

      The application was originally directed against three Contracting

States: Bulgaria, Finland and Turkey. In respect of the Governments of

Bulgaria and Turkey the applicant initially complained of her imminent

expulsion from Turkey to Bulgaria, from where she feared being returned

to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, where she would risk detention

and rape.

      On 9 December 1993 the Commission decided to request the

respondent Governments to submit information on matters connected with

the application. It further decided, pursuant to Rule 36 of the

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

Government that, should the applicant be in that country, it would be

desirable in the interests of the parties and the proper conduct of the

proceedings not to expel her to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

until the Commission had had an opportunity to examine the application.

      Information was submitted by the Governments of Bulgaria and

Finland on 22 December 1993, and by the Government of Turkey on

3 January 1994.

      On 13 January 1994 the applicant withdrew her complaints against

Bulgaria and Turkey.

      On 20 January 1994 the Commission decided to request the

Government of Finland to submit written observations on the

admissibility and merits of the application.

      The Government's observations were submitted on 10 February and

7 March 1994. The applicant submitted comments in reply on 15 and

23 February 1994.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

      In view of the clear intention of the respondent Government to

issue the applicant with a residence permit, which the Commission views

as an undertaking, it finds, pursuant to Article 30 para. 1 (c) of the

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

of her petition. It furthermore finds no special circumstances

regarding respect for Human Rights, as defined in the Convention, which

require the continuation of the examination of the application.

      The Commission finally recalls that under Article 30 para. 3 of

the Convention it may decide to restore a petition to its list of cases

if it considers that the circumstances justify such a course.

      For these reasons, the Commission, by a majority,

      DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES.

Secretary to the Commission            President of the Commission

     (H.C. KRÜGER)                         (C.A. NØRGAARD)

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2024
Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 398107 • Paragraphs parsed: 43931842 • Citations processed 3409255