Search
document

Document text Analytics

M. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 18594/91 • ECHR ID: 001-1251

Document date: February 19, 1992

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

M. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 18594/91 • ECHR ID: 001-1251

Document date: February 19, 1992

Cited paragraphs only

Application No. 18594/91

by M.M.

against the United Kingdom

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on

19 February 1992, the following members being present:

MM.C.A. NØRGAARD, President

J.A. FROWEIN

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

SirBasil HALL

MM.F. MARTINEZ RUIZ

C.L. ROZAKIS

Mrs.J. LIDDY

MM.L. LOUCAIDES

J.-C. GEUS

A.V. ALMEIDA RIBEIRO

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

Mr. H.C. KRÃœGER, 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 July 1991 by

M.M. against the United Kingdom and registered on 24 July 1991 under

file No. 18594/91 ;

Having regard to :

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

of the Commission ;

-the information provided by the Government on 6 September

1991 ;

-the response of the applicant on 10 January 1992 ;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant is a citizen of Zaire, born in 1955 and resident

in London. He is represented before the Commission by Ms. Nuala Mole,

Executive Director of Interights, London.

The applicant claimed to have been subjected to inhuman and

degrading treatment in Zaire from which country he fled. Medical

opinion corroborated the applicant's allegations. He was refused

asylum in the United Kingdom on 15 April 1991. After a successful

application for judicial review, his case was reconsidered, but asylum

was again refused on 24 June 1991 because, inter alia, the applicant's

story and circumstances resembled that of several other Zaireans who

had claimed asylum at the same time and because of various

inconsistencies in the applicant's account of events in Zaire.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant originally complained that if he were returned to

Zaire he would suffer further severe ill-treatment contrary to Article

3 of the Convention. He claimed that the decision of the United

Kingdom authorities to return him to Zaire amounted to a breach of

Article 3. He also complained that he had no effective domestic remedy

in United Kingdom law for his Article 3 claim, contrary to Article 13

of the Convention.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 24 July 1991 and registered on

the same day. The applicant requested that the Commission indicate to

the respondent Government, pursuant to Rule 36 of the Commission's

Rules of Procedure, that his removal from the United Kingdom be stayed

pending the Commission's examination of the case. The President of the

Commission decided on 24 July 1991 that, in view of the urgency of the

case with the applicant's imminent removal from the United Kingdom,

notice of the application should be given to the respondent Government,

in accordance with Rules 34 para. 3 and 48 para. 2 (b) of the Rules of

Procedure, and that they should be invited to submit written

observations on the admissibility and merits of the application.

Precedence was also given to the application, pursuant to Rule 33 of

the Rules of Procedure. The Government undertook not to remove the

applicant to Zaire pending a review by the Home Office of the

applicant's case and pending the proceedings before the Commission at

that stage. This undertaking rendered superfluous the applicant's

request for an indication under Rule 36 of the Rules of Procedure.

On 6 September 1991 the Government notified the Commission that,

in the light of new information they had recently received, they had

decided to grant the applicant exceptional leave to remain in the

United Kingdom. On 10 January 1992 the applicant's representative

informed the Commission that, in view of this development, the

applicant wished to withdraw his application.

- 3 -18594/91

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The Commission notes that the applicant has been granted

exceptional leave to remain in the United Kingdom and thus the factual

basis of his application has been resolved. Moreover, his request to

withdraw his application indicates that he does not intend to pursue

his case further. The Commission finds that the conditions of Article

30 para. 1 of the Convention have been fulfilled and that there are no

reasons of a general character affecting respect for Human Rights which

require the continued examination of the case.

For these reasons, the Commission unanimously,

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LISTS OF CASES.

Secretary to the CommissionPresident of the Commission

(H.C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant