CEDHCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG21
CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 16 octobre 1986
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:1986:1016DEC001244086
- Date
- 16 octobre 1986
- Publication
- 16 octobre 1986
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleInadmissible
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 16 October 1986, the following members being present:                         MM. C. A. NØRGAARD, President                           J. A. FROWEIN                           G. JÖRUNDSSON                           S. TRECHSEL                           B. KIERNAN                           A. S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK                           A. WEITZEL                           J. C. SOYER                           H. G. SCHERMERS                           H. DANELIUS                           G. BATLINER                           H. VANDENBERGHE                       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 2 October 1986 by R.P against Sweden and registered on 7 October 1986 under file No. 12440/86;   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 submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.   The applicant, Mr. R.P, is a Polish citizen, born in 1964. The applicant is married to a Polish citizen.   They have a son, born in September 1985.   At present they live in Gothenburg.   The applicant came to Sweden on 27 December 1984 to join his mother who is married and living in Sweden.   The mother's husband regards the applicant as his son and since 30 January 1985 the applicant calls himself by his stepfather's family name.   The applicant had a permit to stay in Sweden from 7 November 1984 to 18 July 1985 on the ground of his family links.   On 31 March 1985 the applicant's future wife came from Poland to Sweden with a visa for ninety days.   When she came to Sweden she discovered that she was pregnant.   The applicant submits that he asked for and was granted the right to marry in Sweden and the wife gave birth to the child in Sweden.   On 1 June 1985 the couple married.   The wife submitted a request for permission to stay and work in Sweden.   On 18 September 1985 the son was born.   On 31 January 1986 the National Board of Immigration (statens invandrarverk) refused to grant the applicant and his wife permission to stay any longer in Sweden, and ordered that they and their son be expelled.   The applicant appealed to the Government which rejected the appeal on 18 September 1986.   Since his birth the son has been under medical treatment and is soon to undergo an operation.   The applicant states that the police has told them that they must leave the country on 31 October 1986 at the latest.   COMPLAINTS   The applicant submits that he risks a lenghty prison sentence for desertion in Poland, since he went abroad when he was supposed to do his military service.   He further alleges that, if he is expelled, his family will be isolated from him and his wife would be obliged to take care of the sick child on her own.   The applicant requests a quick decision in view of the imminent expulsion.   THE LAW   The applicant, without invoking any specific Articles of the Convention, complains of the expulsion order issued against him and his family.   He submits inter alia that, if expelled to Poland, he risks a lengthy prison sentence for desertion.   He also submits that his family will be isolated from him and that his wife will be obliged to take care of their sick son.   The Commission has examined the application in the light of Articles 3 and 8 (art. 3, art. 8) of the Convention.   It is established in the Commission's case-law that the Convention does not guarantee to an alien the right to enter or to reside in a particular country, nor a right not to be expelled from a particular country (see eg. Dec. No. 9203/80, 5.5.81, D.R. 24, p. 239).   It is true that the Commission has held that an expulsion may in exceptional circumstances involve a violation of Article 3 (art. 3) of the Convention, which prohibits torture, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment, where there is a serious fear of treatment contrary to Article 3 (art. 3) in the receiving State (see, inter alia Dec. No. 7729/76, 17.12.76, D.R. 7, p. 164 at 172).   The Commission has also held that an issue may arise under Article 8 (art. 8)   of the Convention, which guarantees the right to respect for family life, if a person is expelled from a country where close members of his family are living (see inter alia, Dec. No. 8041/77, 15.12.77, D.R. 12, p. 197).   The Commission considers however that, even if the applicant should be punished for desertion from the army and sentenced to imprisonment in Poland, his expulsion from Sweden cannot be regarded as such treatment as is prohibited by Article 3 (art. 3) of the Convention.   As regards Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention, the Commission recalls that the applicant is a grown-up person with a family of his own.   His expulsion will not lead to a separation from his wife and son, who will be expelled together with the applicant.   The fact that the applicant's mother lives in Sweden is not a sufficient ground for finding that the applicant's expulsion will constitute an interference with his right to respect for his family life under Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention.   Accordingly, the Commission finds that the application does not disclose any appearance of a violation of Articles 3 or 8 (art. 3, art. 8) of the Convention.   It follows that the application is manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 27, para. 2 (art. 27-2) of the Convention.   For these reasons, the Commission   DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE   Secretary to the Commission          President of the Commission   (H. C. KRÜGER)                       (C. A. NØRGAARD)  Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
- Formation
- 21
- Date
- 16 octobre 1986
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1986:1016DEC001244086
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral