Search
document

Document text Analytics

A. v. SWEDEN

Doc ref: 12072/86 • ECHR ID: 001-621

Document date: October 13, 1986

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

A. v. SWEDEN

Doc ref: 12072/86 • ECHR ID: 001-621

Document date: October 13, 1986

Cited paragraphs only

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on

13 October 1986, the following members being present:

MM. C. A. NØRGAARD, President

J. A. FROWEIN

F. ERMACORA

E. BUSUTTIL

G. JÖRUNDSSON

G. TENEKIDES

S. TRECHSEL

B. KIERNAN

A. S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

J. C. SOYER

H. G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

G. BATLINER

J. CAMPINOS

Mrs G. H. THUNE

Sir Basil HALL

Mr. F. MARTINEZ

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

Having regard to Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention for the

Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 4 April 1986 by

M.C. and his family against Sweden and registered on 4 April 1986

under file No. 12072/86;

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 facts of the case, as they appear from the applicants'

submissions, may be summarised as follows:

The applicants are the members of the A. family, Pakistani citizens.

The individual members of the family are:

1. Mr. M.C., born 1933

2. Mrs. A.R., born 1940

3. N.A., born 1965

4. T.A., born 1970

5. T.A., born 1982.

Before the Commission the applicants are represented by Mr. Sten de

Geer, a lawyer practising in Stockholm.

The applicants applied for political asylum in Sweden alleging risk of

persecution in their home country, Pakistan, on account of membership

of the Ahmadiyya sect. The National Board of Immigration (statens

invandrarverk) refused the application and decided that the applicants

should be expelled. Following appeal from the applicants the

Government, on 7 November 1985, confirmed the decision of the

Immigration Board.

Following the decision on expulsion Mrs. Amtul Rashid tried to commit

suicide twice. As a result of this, the issue of the enforcement of

the expulsion order was transmitted to the National Board of

Immigration for reconsideration. On 4 February 1986 the Board decided

that the decision on expulsion should be enforced. This resulted in

Mrs. Amtul Rashid being taken into hospital for psychiatric care.

On 8 February 1986 the son Taskeen tried to commit suicide as a result

of the expulsion decision. He was thereafter, for some time, treated

at the Children's and Juveniles' Psychiatric Clinic in Gothenburg.

Further medical certificates were issued at the beginning of March

1986 and as a result thereof the police authority of Gothenburg again

transmitted the issue of the enforcement of the expulsion decision to

the National Board of Immigration for reconsideration. On 27 March

1986 the Board decided that there was no obstacle to the enforcement

of the decision.

The third applicant was taken into custody on 14 March 1986 and the

other applicants were taken into custody on 16 March 1986.

Further medical certificates were issued on 2 April 1986 and as a

result thereof the matter of enforcement was again on 3 April 1986

transmitted to the National Board of Immigration for reconsideration.

The question of the enforcement of the expulsion decision was then

transmitted to the Government which on 17 April 1986 quashed the

expulsion order.

Subsequently the applicants were granted residence permits in Sweden.

COMPLAINTS

The applicants refer to numerous medical certificates and allege that

these medical certificates should have resulted in a stay in the

enforcement of the expulsion decision. The failure of the authorities

to decide not to enforce the expulsion decision in the circumstances

constitutes, in the applicants' opinion, a breach of Article 3

(art. 3) of the Convention.

Furthermore the applicants complain that the taking into custody of

the four year-old child also violates Article 3 (art. 3) of the

Convention.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 4 April 1986. It was registered on

the same day.

On the same day, 4 April 1986, the Secretary to the Commission, in

application of Rule 41 of the Rules of Procedure, informed the

Government of the introduction of the application.

On 7 April 1986 the President of the Commission considered the

application in the light of Rule 36 of the Rules of Procedure but

decided that there were not sufficient reasons to apply Rule 36 in the

case.

On 11 April 1986 the applicants' representative informed the Secretary

that the National Board of Immigration had transmitted the issue of

the enforcement of the expulsion decision to the Government for final

determination. Moreover, the Government had upon receipt of the case

decided that the applicants should be released from custody.

On 17 April 1986 the applicants' representative informed the Secretary

that on the same day, i.e. 17 April 1986, the Government had decided

to quash the decision ordering expulsion of the applicants.

By letter of 24 July 1986 the applicants withdrew their application in

view of the fact that they have been granted residence permits in

Sweden.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The Commission notes that the applicants have withdrawn their

application in view of the fact that they have been granted residence

permits in Sweden.

The Commission considers that there are no reasons of a general

character affecting the observance of the Convention which necessitate

the further examination of this case. The Commission, therefore,

accepts the applicants' request to withdraw their application.

For these reasons, the Commission

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