SAMIM v. NORWAY
Doc ref: 16022/90 • ECHR ID: 001-799
Document date: December 10, 1990
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 0
Application No. 16022/90
by Samim and Others
against Norway
The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private
on 10 December 1990, the following members being present:
MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President
S. TRECHSEL
F. ERMACORA
G. SPERDUTI
E. BUSUTTIL
G. JÖRUNDSSON
A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK
A. WEITZEL
J.-C. SOYER
H.G. SCHERMERS
H. DANELIUS
Mrs. G. H. THUNE
Sir Basil HALL
MM. F. MARTINEZ RUIZ
C.L. ROZAKIS
Mrs. J. LIDDY
MM. L. LOUCAIDES
A.V. ALMEIDA RIBEIRO
M.P. PELLONPÄÄ
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 13 December 1989
by Seyed Jaqoub Shah SAMIM and Others against Norway and registered
on 22 January 1990 under file No. 16022/90;
Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the
Rules of Procedure of the Commission;
Having deliberated;
Decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants are a family of seven, all of Afghan nationality.
They are:
1. Seyed Jaqoub Shah Samim, born in 1937, and his wife,
2. Janara Shah Samim, and their children,
3. Shahnaz Shah Samim, born in 1965,
4. Seyed Jousef Shah Samim, born in 1967,
5. Farzana Shah Samim, born in 1970,
6. Seyed Ebrahim Shah Samim, born in 1972, and
7. Hasina Shah Samim, born in 1973.
Before the Commission they are represented by
Mr. Terje Einarsen, Bergen, Norway.
The applicants complain of the Norwegian authorities'
intention to expel them to Pakistan. They claim that such an
expulsion would amount to inhuman treatment and deprive them of the
right to liberty and security of person. They invoke Articles 3, 5, 8
and 13 of the Convention.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION
The application was introduced on 13 December 1989 and
registered on 22 January 1990.
On 10 February 1990 the Commission decided to bring the
application to the notice of the respondent Government, inviting them
to submit written observations on the admissibility and merits of the
case. The Commission also decided to apply Rule 36 of its Rules of
Procedure, having found that it was desirable not to deport the
applicants to Pakistan until it had had an opportunity to examine the
application further.
The Government's observations, in which they maintained that
the applicants' complaints were manifestly ill-founded and therefore
inadmissible, were submitted on 8 March 1990. The applicants'
observations in reply, in which they maintained that their complaints
were well-founded and therefore admissible, were submitted on 25 March
1990. Free legal aid was granted to the applicants by the Commission
on 13 July 1990.
By letter of 28 November 1990 the applicants informed the
Commission that they had been granted a visa for Austria. The visa
would expire on 21 February 1991. The Austrian embassy in Oslo had
informed them that they could go to Austria and apply for asylum
whenever they liked before 21 February 1991, and that the Austrian
Ministry of the Interior was informed of their case. The applicants
furthermore submitted that they were prepared to take advantage of the
offer made by the Austrian authorities.
Nevertheless the applicants have requested the Commission to
decide whether it would be contrary to the Convention to deport them
to Pakistan since such a decision, if in their favour, might make the
Norwegian authorities change their mind, and allow them to stay in
Norway where they prefer to live.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
Having regard to Article 30 para. 1 (c) of the Convention, the
Commission notes that the applicants no longer run the risk of being
deported to Pakistan as they may go to Austria whenever they like
before 21 February 1991 and apply for asylum there. In these
circumstances the Commission finds that a continued examination of the
petition is no longer justified. Furthermore, it finds no special
circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the
Convention which require the continuation of the examination of the
application.
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)