CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 12 novembre 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; 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 } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Communicated on 12 November 2019   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 12538/19 Isam AL-BAYATI against Germany lodged on 1 March 2019 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the compatibility of the expulsion order and re ‑ entry ban against the applicant, an Iraqi national, with his right to respect for his family life as guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention. The domestic courts found that the applicant had previously provided support to an organisation supporting terrorism, that he had not recognisably and credibly distanced himself from that activity endangering the state, and that he continued to pose a current threat to national security. The domestic courts concluded that the State’s interests in removing the applicant outweighed the latter’s interest to remain in Germany. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Did the expulsion order and re-entry ban against the applicant violate his right to respect for his family life with his wife, a Turkish national lawfully residing in Germany, and their two minor children, who have German nationality, as guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention? In particular, did the domestic courts thoroughly establish and assess all relevant circumstances and carefully balance the competing interests, in a manner consistent with the Convention and the Court’s case-law, when they assessed the proportionality of the expulsion order and re-entry ban, and did they put forward relevant and sufficient reasons for their decisions (see, in particular, I.M. v. Switzerland , no. 23887/16, 9 April 2019), in particular as regards: -     the effects of the applicant’s expulsion and re-entry ban on his family life with his wife and children, and notably (i) the best interests and well ‑ being of the children, (ii) the family’s ability to enjoy their family life in another country, respectively (iii) the seriousness of the difficulties which the applicant’s spouse and children are likely to encounter in the country to which the applicant is to be expelled; -     the finding that the applicant posed a current threat to national security?