THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 61452/15 Zenab SOUMAH against the Netherlands

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 5 June 2018 as a Committee composed of:

Dmitry Dedov , President, Alena Poláčková , Jolien Schukking, judges,

and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 9 December 2015,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Ms Zenab Soumah , is a Guinean national, who was born in 1993 and lives in Amersfoort. She was represented before the Court by Ms A. Szirmai , a lawyer practising in Heerenveen .

The Dutch Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms B. Koopman , of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The applicant complained that her minor daughter, who was born in the Netherlands, will be subjected to female genital mutilation (hereafter “FGM”), and thus treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention, if they were to be returned to Guinea.

After the Government had been given notice of the application, they informed the Court on 22 February 2018 that they had been notified by the Belgian authorities that the applicant had taken up residence in Belgium with her husband and that she had been granted a residence permit in that country, which permit was valid from 1 August 2017 until 17 July 2022. On this basis, the Government requested the Court to strike the case out of the list of pending cases.

On 14 March 2018 the applicant, having been invited to comment, replied that she did not wish to withdraw the application as the Court ’ s view on the case was important not only to her but to all Guinean women who face a real risk of being subjected to FGM when deported to Guinea.

THE LAW

The Court notes that the applicant has been granted a residence permit in Belgium and no longer faces removal to Guinea. As it has not been informed of the contrary by either of the parties, the Court assumes that the applicant ’ s daughter has also obtained legal residence in Belgium. For these reasons, the Court considers that the matter complained of has been resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention and that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols does not require it to continue the examination of the application under Article 37 § 1 in fine .

Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

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

Done in English and notified in writing on 28 June 2018 .

FatoÅŸ Aracı Dmitry Dedov              Deputy Registrar President