Search
document

EAST AFRICAN ASIANS AGAINST THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 4403/70, 4404/70, 4405/70, 4406/70, 4407/70, 4408/70, 4409/70, 4410/70, 4411/70, 4412/70, 4413/70, 4... • ECHR ID: 001-49222

Document date: March 21, 1994

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

EAST AFRICAN ASIANS AGAINST THE UNITED KINGDOM

Doc ref: 4403/70, 4404/70, 4405/70, 4406/70, 4407/70, 4408/70, 4409/70, 4410/70, 4411/70, 4412/70, 4413/70, 4... • ECHR ID: 001-49222

Document date: March 21, 1994

Cited paragraphs only

RESOLUTION DH (77) 2

The Committee of Ministers,

Having regard to Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention for the

Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter

referred to as "the convention");

Having regard to the report drawn up by the European Commission of

Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31) of the convention

relating to 31 applications lodged by East African Asians against the

United Kingdom (Nos. 4403/70-4419/70, 4422/70, 4423/70, 4434/70,

4443/70, 4476/70-4478/70, 4486/70, 4501/70 and 4526/70-4530/70);

Whereas on 5 March 1974 the Commission transmitted the said report to

the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three months

provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the convention

has elapsed without the cases having been brought before the European

Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the

convention;

Whereas in the applications introduced between 10 February and

9 June 1970 the applicants complained of violations of several

articles of the convention in respect of the refusal of the United

Kingdom to admit them into Great Britain or allow them to stay there

permanently;

Whereas the Commission declared on 10 October and 18 December 1970 the

applications admissible in so far as they raised issues under

Articles 3, 5 and 14 (art. 3, art. 5, art. 14) of the convention as

well as the complaints of three applicants in regard to Articles 8 and

14 (art. 8, art. 14) and declared inadmissible all other complaints;

Whereas the Commission in its report adopted on 14 December 1973

expressed the opinion by 8 votes to 3 that Article 3 (art. 3) of the

convention had been violated in the case of 25 applications of

citizens of the United Kingdom and colonies, unanimously that

Article 3 (art. 3) had not been violated in the cases of six

applications of British protected persons, by 10 votes to 1 that

Article 5 (art. 5) had not been violated nor Articles 5 and 14

(art. 14+5) taken together, by 9 votes to 2 that Articles 8 and 14

(art. 14+8) taken together had been violated in the cases of three

applicants;

Whereas the United Kingdom Government, in its memorandum

submitted on 6 May 1975 to the Committee of Ministers, stated that in

its view there was no violation of the convention in the matter

covered by the report of the Commission;

Having taken note with satisfaction of the measures adopted by

the United Kingdom Government to facilitate the entry to the United

Kingdom of United Kingdom passport holders from East Africa and noting

in this respect in particular that all 31 applicants are now settled

in the United Kingdom;

Recalling that the annual quota, having been initially fixed at

1 500 heads of household, was increased progressively to 5 000 by 1975

and also that since 1974 the United Kingdom's immigration rules have

permitted husbands to join wives settled in the United Kingdom;

Noting that as a result of these measures the special vouchers

enabling heads of households and their families to enter the United

Kingdom for settlement are now available on demand in East Africa and

that in this respect the problems which gave rise to the applications

no longer exist;

Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32,

paragraph 1 (art. 32-1) of the convention,

Decides:

i. that there had been no violation of Article 3 (art. 3) of the

convention as regards six applications presented by British protected

persons;

ii. that there had been no violation of Article 5 (art. 5) nor of

Articles 5 and 14 (art. 14+5) of the convention taken together;

iii. that, after having noted that the majority of two thirds of the

members entitled to sit, as required by Article 32, paragraph 1

(art. 32-1), of the convention, had not been attained, no further

action is called for in the cases of 25 applications of citizens of

the United Kingdom and colonies with regard to Article 3 (art. 3) of

the convention and in the cases of three applications with regard to

Articles 8 and 14 (art. 14+8) of the convention taken together, and

accordingly removes the examination of the case from its agenda.

* *

RESOLUTION DH (94) 30

The Committee of Ministers,

Having regard to Resolution DH (77) 2 whereby the Committee

removed the examination of the case from its agenda;

Having regard to the request formulated by the Government

of the United Kingdom on 25 February 1994 to have the report of

the European Commission of Human Rights in this case made public,

Decides to make public the above-mentioned report of the

Commission.

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant