THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 1989/07 by Carmen Emilia ROJAS ARENAS and Others against the Netherlands

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 6 September 2007 as a Chamber composed of:

Mr B.M. Zupančič , President , Mr C. Bîrsan , Mrs E. Fura-Sandström , Mrs A. Gyulumyan , Mr E. Myjer , Mrs I. Ziemele , Mrs I. Berro-Lefèvre, judges , and Mr S. Quesada , Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 12 January 2007,

Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together ,

Having regard to the interim measure indicated to the respondent Government under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court and the fact that this interim measure has been complied with,

Having regard to the decision to grant priority to the above application unde r Rule 41 of the Rules of Court,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicants, Ms Carmen Emilia Rojas Arenas and her children Mauricio Julian Aristizabal Rojas and Mayra Alejandra Aristizabal Rojas , are Colombian nationals who were born in 1962, 1984 and 1994 respectively and live in Dokkum . They were represented before the Court by Ms M.L. van Riel, a lawyer practising in Hoorn . The Dutch Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr R.A.A. Böcker , of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs .

The circumstances of the case

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

The applicants applied for asylum in the Netherlands on 5 April 2004, submitting that the first applicant had been kidnapped and declared a military target by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia ( Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia – “FARC”), that her car had been shot at, that she had received numerous telephone threats from the FARC and that an attempt had been made to kidnap the third applicant. Although the Regional Court ( arrondissementsrechtbank ) of The Hague, sitting in Den Bosch, upheld the applicants ’ appeal against the decision of the Minister for Immigration and Integration ( Minister voor Vreemdelingenzaken en Integratie ) of 18 July 2005 rejecting the asylum application, the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State ( Afdeling Bestuursrechtspraak van de Raad van State ) overturned that court ’ s ruling in a final decision of 19 December 2006.

In a letter of 6 April 2007, the Government informed the Court that the Deputy Minister of Justice ( Staatssecretaris van Justitie ; the successor of the Minister for Immigration and Integration) had decided that the applicants were eligible for a residence permit. On 27 April 2007 the Deputy Minister withdrew her predecessor ’ s decision of 18 July 2005 and granted the applicants a residence permit for the purpose of asylum.

On 3 May 2007 the applicants informed the Court that they assumed the proceedings had now come to an end.

COMPLAINT

The applicants originally c omplained that their expulsion to Colombia would expose them to a real risk of being subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention.

THE LAW

The applicants complained that a forced return to Colombia would violate their rights under Article 3 of the Convention. However, the Court notes that the applicants have now been granted a residence permit for the purpose of asylum in the Netherlands and that they are thus no longer at risk of being expelled. In these circumstances, and having regard to Article 37 § 1 (a and b) of the Convention, the Court is of the opinion that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine , the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the examination of the application to be continued. Accordingly, it is appropriate to discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and Rule 39 of the Rules of Court and to strike the case out the list .

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.

Santiago Quesada Boštjan M. Zupančič Registrar President