CEDH · CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG — 18 septembre 1998

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sDD06DED3 { width:326.58pt; font-family:'Lucida Console'; display:inline-block } .sF1885A68 { width:173.89pt; font-family:'Lucida Console'; display:inline-block } .s2C9D90D6 { width:216.54pt; font-family:'Lucida Console'; display:inline-block } .s21B97EC1 { width:25.99pt; display:inline-block } .s5BA4079A { width:22.66pt; display:inline-block } .sFD1C8E96 { width:16.01pt; display:inline-block } .s498DF152 { width:9.33pt; display:inline-block } .s2A75809F { width:2.67pt; display:inline-block } .sEA7DAF3 { width:30.64pt; display:inline-block } .s8AFB426F { width:32.67pt; display:inline-block } .sB11B45BD { width:19.32pt; display:inline-block }     EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS         Application No. 37534/97         Aziz Sarialtun and Others         against         Germany       REPORT OF THE COMMISSION     (adopted on 18 September 1998)       TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                                                                     Page         INTRODUCTION ............................................. 1     PART I   :          STATEMENT OF THE FACTS ........................ 3     PART II            SOLUTION REACHED ............................. 4     INTRODUCTION   1.   This Report relates to the application introduced under Article 25 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by Mr Aziz Sarialtun and Ms Hatice Sarialtun, a married couple, and their children Meliha Kunduru, Fidan Sarialtun, Fatma Sarialtun, Esme Sarialtun,   Tahir Sarialtun and Zeliha Sarialtun against Germany on 26 August 1997.   It was registered on 28 August 1997 under file No. 37534/97.   2.   The applicants were represented by Mr R. Marx and partners, a law firm in Frankfurt am Main.   3.   The Government of Germany were represented by their Agent, Ms. H. Voelskow-Thies, Ministerialdirigentin, of the Federal Ministry of Justice.   4.   On 23 April 1998 the Commission declared the application admissible insofar as it concerned the applicants' envisaged expulsion to Turkey.   It then proceeded to carry out its task under Article 28 para. 1 of the Convention which provides as follows:     "In the event of the Commission accepting a petition referred to it:     a.   it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts, undertake together with the representatives of the parties an examination of the petition and, if need be, an investigation, for the effective conduct of which the States concerned shall furnish all necessary facilities, after an exchange of views with the Commission;     b.   it shall at the same time place itself at the disposal of the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in this Convention."   5.   The Commission found that the parties had reached a friendly settlement of the case and on 18 September 1998 it adopted this Report, which, in accordance with Article 28 para. 2 of the Convention, is confined to a brief statement of the facts and of the solution reached.   6.   The following members were present when the Report was adopted:       MM   S. TRECHSEL, President       J.-C. GEUS           E. BUSUTTIL       G. JÖRUNDSSON       A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK       A. WEITZEL       J.-C. SOYER       H. DANELIUS     Mrs   G.H. THUNE           MM   F. MARTINEZ       C.L. ROZAKIS     Mrs   J. LIDDY     MM   L. LOUCAIDES       B. MARXER       M.A. NOWICKI       B. CONFORTI       N. BRATZA       I. BÉKÉS       D. ŠVÁBY       G. RESS       A. PERENIČ       P. LORENZEN       K. HERNDL       E. BIELIŪNAS           E.A. ALKEMA       M. VILA AMIGÓ     Mrs   M. HION     MM   R. NICOLINI       A. ARABADJIEV       PART I       STATEMENT OF THE FACTS   7.   The applicants are members of a Turkish family of Kurdish ethnic origin.   When lodging their application they were living in Seilersbach.     8.   The first applicant left Turkey for the first time in 1987.   His request for asylum was dismissed by the Federal Office for Refugees (Bundesamt für die Anerkennung ausländischer Flüchtlinge) in 1988.   He withdrew his appeal with the Koblenz Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgericht) and was deported to Turkey in June 1989.   According to the applicants, they subsequently had repeatedly problems with special forces of the Turkish police authorities.   In particular, in the first applicant's submission, he was detained and subjected to torture and ill-treatment such as beating with fists and shoes and "falaka", i.e. beating on the soles of his feet, during his questioning by the special forces.   Upon his release, he was allegedly threatened with death in case he should further assist his relatives or other members of the PKK.   9.   On 16 October 1991 the first applicant returned to Germany, together with his wife and children.   They applied for asylum.     10.   On 15 October 1993 the Federal Office dismissed their requests on the ground that they had failed to show any persecution reaching a level of severity requiring that they be granted asylum.     11.   On 11 December 1995 the Koblenz Administrative Court dismissed the applicants' actions challenging the refusal of asylum.   The Court found that the applicants had failed to show a real risk of individual persecution for political reasons.     12.   On 20 February 1996 the applicants renewed their requests for asylum, relying on new evidence to prove their persecution and risk of ill-treatment if returned to Turkey.   On 8 July 1996 the Federal Office refused to conduct new asylum proceedings.   13.   The applicants filed an action with the Koblenz Administrative Court challenging the decision of 8 July 1996 and applied for interim judicial protection, i.e. a court decision to stop their deportation.   On 17 September 1996 the Administrative Court dismissed their requests for interim judicial protection. On 11 October 1996 and 6 November 1996, respectively, the Administrative Court dismissed their requests for a review of this refusal.   Their renewed requests were to no avail. 14.   On 11 August 1997 the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) refused to entertain their constitutional complaint (Verfassungsbeschwerde).                                                                      15.   The applicants complained under Article 3 of the Convention about their envisaged deportation to Turkey.   They also invoked Article 8 para. 1 and Article 13 of the Convention.       PART II       SOLUTION REACHED     16.   Following the decision on the admissibility of the application, the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view to securing a friendly settlement in accordance with Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention and invited the parties to submit any proposals they wished to make.   17.   In accordance with the usual practice, the Secretary, acting on the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to explore the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement.   18.   By letters of 6 and 7 August 1998, the parties notified the Commission that they had agreed on the following terms of a friendly settlement:   (German)     "Die Bundesrepublik Deutschland, vertreten durch die Verfahrens-bevollmächtigte Ministerialdirigentin Dr. Helga Voelskow-Thies, das Land Rheinland-Pfalz, vertreten durch Regierungsdirektor Bremann, sowie die Beschwerdeführer, vertreten durch Rechtsanwalt Dr. Reinhard Marx, einigen sich auf folgende gütliche Regelung:     1.   Das Bundesamt für die Anerkennung ausländischer Flüchtlinge gewährt den Beschwerdeführern Abschiebungsschutz nach  53 Abs. 4 Ausländergesetz (AuslG) in Verbindung mit Artikel 3 EMRK.     2.   Sodann wird die zuständige Ausländerbehörde des Landes Rheinland-Pfalz die Beschwerdeführer zunächst für die Dauer eines Jahres dulden. Diese Duldung kann in eine - zunächst befristete - Aufenthaltsbefugnis umgewandelt werden, falls der Beschwerdeführer einen Arbeitsplatz nachweist, der ihn in den Stand versetzt, sich und seine Familie zumindest zu einem überwiegenden Teil auf Dauer zu unterhalten. Soweit der Beschwerdeführer einen solchen Nachweis vor Ablauf der einjährigen Duldung erbringt, wird die Ausländerbehörde die Erteilung einer Aufenthaltsbefugnis zu einem früheren Zeitpunkt wohlwollend prüfen.     3.   Im Hinblick auf Ziffern 1. und 2. erklären die Beschwerde-führer ihre Individualbeschwerde Nr. 37534/97 gegen die Bundesrepublik Deutschland insgesamt für erledigt.     4.   Die Verfahrensbevollmächtigte der Bundesrepublik Deutsch-land verpflichtet sich, diese Einigung unverzüglich der Europäischen Kommission für Menschenrechte mitzuteilen."   (Translation)     "The Federal Republic of Germany, represented by the Agent, Dr. Helga Voelskow-Thies, Ministerialdirigentin, the Land of Rhineland-Palatinate, represented by Mr. Bremann, Oberregierungs-rat, and the Applicants, represented by Dr. Reinhard Marx, Rechtsanwalt, agree on the following friendly settlement:     1.   The Federal Office for Refugees shall grant the applicants protection from deportation pursuant to S. 53 para. 4 of the Aliens Act in conjunction with Article 3 of the Convention.     2.   Furthermore, the competent aliens authority of the Land of Rhineland-Palatinate shall grant the applicants suspension of deportation (Duldung), initially for the duration of one year. This suspension of deportation may be converted into an - initially temporary - residence title for exceptional purposes [Aufenthaltsbefugnis] if the applicant can provide evidence that he has a job which puts him in a position to permanently support himself and his family, at least for the greater part. Should the applicant provide such evidence before the one-year suspension of deportation expires, the aliens authority shall give sympathetic consideration to whether a residence title for exceptional purposes may be granted earlier.     3.   In consideration of paras. 1 and 2 above, the applicants declare that their Application No. 37534/97 against the Federal Republic of Germany has been settled in all respects.     4.   The Agent of the Federal Republic of Germany undertakes to inform the European Commission of Human Rights of this settlement immediately."     19.   At its session on 18 September 1998, the Commission noted that the parties had reached an agreement regarding the terms of a settlement.   It further considered, having regard to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention, that the friendly settlement of the case had been secured on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention.   20.   For these reasons, the Commission adopted the present Report.               M. de SALVIA                                                         S. TRECHSEL          Secretary                                                                         President       to the Commission                                                   of the Commission