CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 19 décembre 2011

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s3E839E41 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:30pt; text-align:center } .sDA30A789 { margin-top:30pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:center } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s4070A5A6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:24pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid } .sCDABDDB1 { margin-top:24pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify }     FOURTH SECTION Application no. 75972/11 T.B. against Poland lodged on 9 December 2011 STATEMENT OF FACTS THE FACTS The applicant is a national of the Democratic Republic of Congo. She is represented by Ms. K. Slubik of Stowarzyszenie Interwencji Prawnej (Association for Legal Intervention). The facts of the case as submitted by the applicant may be summarised as follows. The applicant was stopped at the Polish border on 3 June 2011, when she was trying to enter the Polish territory from Russia. The basis of her claims was that she had been arrested while distributing leaflets of a political content and that she had been arrested in Kinshasa. She claimed that during her detention she had been subject to mistreatment, violence and rape by the secret police and/or prison guards. She escaped from prison with help of a prison guard and illegally left the DRC in January 2011 using a false passport. The applicant submits that her real name is A.M. On 15 June 2011 the applicant instituted administrative proceedings requesting refugee status or subsidiary protection in Poland. The psychologist present at the statutory interview of the applicant by the Office for Repatriation and Aliens accepted that it was possible that the applicant was suffering from PTSD and that further diagnosis was required. On 8   September 2011 the applicant’s asylum claim was refused pursuant to a decision of the President of the Office for Repatriation and Aliens and the applicant’s expulsion was ordered. On 5 December 2011 the Council for Refugees upheld the first instance decision. The administrative authorities found the applicant’s statements not credible in order to grant her the requested status. They found that the applicant’s passport was genuine. They argued that the applicant left the DRC legally and for other reasons than risks of sexual violence (as she maintained in the course of the domestic proceedings). The authorities further found that the criteria for the application of the Geneva Conventions were not met, denying inter alia the applicant’s membership in the particular social group . Further, the domestic authorities considered that the current situation in the DRC does not expose the applicant to the imminent health risks, referring to the reports of the Polish Foreign Service authorities in Luanda, Angola. The Council for Refugees refused to consider a psychological opinion which had been prepared for the applicant and which supported her claim that she suffered from PTSD. On 20 December 2011 the applicant filed a complaint against the final administrative decision with the Warsaw Administrative Court and requested suspension of expulsion. COMPLAINTS The applicant complains under Article 3 about her expulsion to the DRC. In particular, she refers to the deplorable situation of women in the DRC. She fears that she will be arrested and that she will be the object of sexual violence upon her return to the DRC. Further, the applicant also complains that a complaint to an independent administrative court in the refugee court procedure, even if accompanied by a request for suspension of expulsion, has no suspensive effect. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     In the light of the applicant’s claims and documents submitted would the applicant face a real risk of being subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention if the expulsion order was enforced? 2.     Is there an interference with the applicant’s right to an effective remedy under Article 13 given, in particular, the non-suspensive character of the complaint to the Polish administrative courts?