CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 17 juin 2019

.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 } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Communicated on 17 June 2019   SECOND SECTION Application no. 48372/18 M.A. and M.A. against Norway lodged on 28 September 2018 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns a decision to remove the applicants’ parental responsibilities in respect of their son, X, and to authorise that X be adopted by his foster parents. Under Article 8 of the Convention the applicants submit that the decision to authorise the adoption of their son violated their right to respect for their family life. Under Article 9 they maintain that the decision violated their right to freedom of religion. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to respect for their family life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention, through the authorities’ decision to remove their parental responsibilities in respect of their son and to authorise that the latter be adopted by his foster parents (see, for example, S.S. v. Slovenia , no. 40938/16, 30 October 2018; S.H. v. Italy , no. 52557/14, 13 October 2015; Pontes v. Portugal , no. 19554/09, 10 April 2012; and Aune v. Norway , no. 52502/07, 28 October 2010)?   2.     Does the complaint raise a separate issue under Article 9 of the Convention? If yes, has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to freedom of religion as guaranteed by that provision?