Search
document

Document text Analytics

CETIN v. SWITZERLAND

Doc ref: 16706/90 • ECHR ID: 001-711

Document date: July 13, 1990

Inbound citations: 0
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 1

CETIN v. SWITZERLAND

Doc ref: 16706/90 • ECHR ID: 001-711

Document date: July 13, 1990

Cited paragraphs only

AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

Application No. 16706/90

by Seyit CETIN

against Switzerland

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private

on 13 July 1990, the following members being present:

MM. J.A. FROWEIN, Acting President

S. TRECHSEL

F. ERMACORA

G. SPERDUTI

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

J.-C. SOYER

H.G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

Mrs. G. H. THUNE

Sir Basil HALL

MM. F. MARTINEZ RUIZ

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. L. LOUCAIDES

J.-C. GEUS

A.V. ALMEIDA RIBEIRO

Mr. J. RAYMOND, Deputy 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 16 May 1990

by Seyit CETIN against Switzerland and registered on 12 June 1990

under file No. 16706/90;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 40 of the

Rules of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant, a Turkish citizen born in 1956, is a painter

residing at Basel in Switzerland.

According to the applicant's statements subsequently made

before the Swiss authorities in 1984, while he resided at Nevsehir in

Turkey he first belonged to an extreme right wing organisation. In

1980 he joined the left wing organisation Dev Yol. As a result, he

was threatened by right wing extremists; shots were fired at his shop.

In a fight with right wing extremists he injured one person, whereupon

he no longer felt safe and went into hiding in Istanbul. In December

1981 he attempted to travel via Austria to the Federal Republic of

Germany, though he was refused entry into Austria. He then returned

to Turkey.

On 10 April 1984 the applicant again left Turkey. On 15 April

1984 he entered Switzerland whereupon he applied for asylum at the

Aliens' Police of the Canton of Basel-Stadt on account of persecution

in Turkey. This request was dismissed by the Delegate for Refugees

(Delegierte für das Flüchtlingswesen) on 16 October 1989.

The applicant's subsequent appeal (Beschwerde) was dismissed

by the Federal Department of Justice and Police (Eidgenössisches

Justiz- und Polizeidepartement) on 26 April 1990. The Department

found that the applicant had failed to demonstrate sufficiently

concrete measures of persecution. The Department saw a confirmation

therefor in the fact that the applicant had been able to leave and

subsequently to reenter Turkey in 1981. Insofar as the applicant

claimed to have been sentenced to imprisonment in Turkey on account of

his political activities, the Department noted that the applicant had

been asked to submit within a time-limit a document to substantiate

this allegation, but he had failed to do so.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains of his expulsion to Turkey which,

after so many years in Switzerland, would constitute hardship for him.

Insofar as the Swiss authorities criticised his lack of integration in

Switzerland, for instance with regard to his irregular employment or

certain criminal offences, he claims that this is partly due to

certain misunderstandings. While he lost his money with gambling, he

has imposed upon himself a prohibition from entering the gambling

parlours concerned. The applicant claims that his wife and two

children must leave him if he returns home penniless.

The applicant does not rely on any particular provision of the

Convention.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 16 May 1990 and registered

on 12 June 1990.

On 12 June 1990 the Acting President decided not to apply

Rule 36 of the Commission's Rules of Procedure.

THE LAW

The applicant complains, without referring to any particular

provision of the Convention, of his expulsion to Turkey which on

account of his integration in Switzerland and the ensuing lack of

income would cause hardship to him and his family in Turkey.

The Commission has constantly held that the right of an alien

to reside in a particular country is not as such guaranteed by the

Convention. However, expulsion may in exceptional circumstances

involve a violation of the Convention, for example where there is a

serious fear of treatment contrary to Article 3 (Art. 3) of the

Convention (see No. 12102/86, Dec. 9.5.86, D.R. 47 p. 286).

In the present case the applicant has not raised any

allegations before the Commission which might indicate the existence

of such exceptional circumstances.

Even assuming that the applicant may be understood as

referring in his application to the submissions he made before the

Swiss authorities, the Commission notes that the alleged persecution

occurred in 1980 and that subsequently he was able to leave and

reenter Turkey in 1981 without difficulties. Moreover, the applicant

failed to submit, both before the Swiss authorities and the

Commission, any documents which would have substantiated his

allegations regarding persecution in the past.

As a result, the Commission cannot find the circumstances to

be such as to warrant the conclusion that the applicant's expulsion

would be contrary to Article 3 (Art. 3) of the Convention on account

of a risk of ill-treatment in Turkey.

In any event the Commission notes that after his return to

Turkey the applicant can bring an application before the Commission

under Article 25 (Art. 25) of the Convention in respect of any

violation of his Convention rights by the Turkish authorities.

The application must therefore be rejected as being manifestly

ill-founded within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the

Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission

DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE.

Deputy Secretary to the Commission Acting President of the Commission

(J. RAYMOND) (J. A. FROWEIN)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant