CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 10 décembre 2013

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s651475FF { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Communicated on 19 December 2013   THIRD SECTION Application no. 71247/13 Y.M. against the Netherlands lodged on 14 November 2013 STATEMENT OF FACTS FACTS 1.     The applicant, Mr Y.M., is a citizen of Somalia. He was born in 1987 and is currently staying in the Netherlands. He is represented before the Court by Mr I. Vreeken, a lawyer practising in Zutphen. 2.     The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. 3.     On 30 October 2009 the applicant applied for asylum in the Netherlands. The final negative decision on this application was taken by the Administrative Jurisdiction Division ( Afdeling bestuursrechtspraak van de Raad van State) on 20 April 2011. 4.     On 13 January 2012 the applicant applied for a second time for asylum in the Netherlands. The final negative decision on this application was taken by the Administrative Jurisdiction Division on 17 October 2013. COMPLAINTS 5.     The applicant complains under Article 2 of the Convention that there are substantial grounds for believing that he will be killed by al-Shabaab if he were expelled to Somalia. 6.     The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention that there are substantial grounds for believing that he will be subjected to treatment prohibited by that provision by al-Shabaab if he were expelled to Somalia. QUESTIONS 1.     In the light of the applicant’s claims and the documents which have been submitted, could the applicant safely reach his hometown of Qooryooley in South Central Somalia without being at real risk of being killed or of treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention by al-Shabaab? More specifically as regards to Article 3, can it be said that the applicant has recent experience of living in Somalia and can he therefore avoid coming to the attention of al-Shabaab (see Sufi and Elmi v. the United Kingdom , nos. 8319/07 and 11449/07, § 295, 28 June 2011)? 2.     Alternatively, is there an internal flight or relocation alternative elsewhere in southern and or central Somalia, particular in respect of Mogadishu, that the applicant could travel to, to which he could gain admittance and where he could settle without being exposed to a real risk of treatment in breach of Article 3 (see the UNHCR letter to legal counsel regarding guidance on the application of IFA/IRA particularly in respect of Mogadishu, Somalia , 25 September 2013 (available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/524400964.html))?