CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 18 octobre 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF74FAE64 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8.5pt } Published on 8 November 2021   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 32651/21 Mohamed Mohummed GOOD against the Netherlands lodged on 15 June 2021 communicated on 18 October 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the decision to revoke the applicant’s residence permit and to impose a ten-year entry ban on him. The applicant is a Somalian national born in 1989 who entered the Netherlands when he was 6 months old. Prior to the impugned decision, which was taken on 30 July 2019, he held a residence permit on humanitarian grounds for indefinite duration. The Deputy Minister of Justice and Security, relying on the applicant’s criminal record that included convictions of theft, insult, and destruction of property, made the impugned decision because she considered that   the   applicant posed a threat to public order. Most recently, on 28   February 2019, the applicant was convicted of theft and trespass and sentenced to placement in an institution for systematic offenders ( ISD-maatregel ) for two years and he is currently detained in such an institution where he is getting psychological treatment for his mental issues. In the Deputy Minister’s view, the impugned decision did not violate the applicant’s right to respect for his private life under Article 8 because the interests of the community   as a whole outweighed   the personal interests of the applicant. This decision was upheld by the national courts. Although he is under an obligation to leave the Netherlands, the authorities will not expel him to Somalia as they consider this would be in breach of Article 3 of the Convention. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the revocation of the applicant’s residence permit and the imposition on an entry ban constitute a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his private life contrary to Article 8 of the Convention, taking into account the specific facts and circumstances of the case (including that the applicant, who is a vulnerable person (mental issues) without any skills and a supportive network, will not be expelled to Somalia and has no ties with any other country)?