CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 12 février 2026

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } Published on 2 March 2026   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 22120/22 M.O. against Bulgaria lodged on 29 April 2022 communicated on 12 February 2026 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s removal from Bulgaria, ordered on national security grounds. The applicant is a Tunisian national. He arrived in Bulgaria in 2019, having married a Bulgarian citizen the previous year and having beforehand resided in other European countries, notably France and Romania. The applicant was granted a residence permit valid until 2022. In June 2021, however, the head of the Migration Department of the Sofia branch of the Ministry of the Interior revoked his permit, alleging links to terrorist activities. The applicant sought judicial review of that decision. During the proceedings, the Migration Department relied on information from the State Agency for National Security. This included data from Interpol and the United States government concerning a person identified only with a given name and a surname, identical to those of the applicant, as well as information from the Schengen Information System referring to a person with the same given name and surname but different middle names. The applicant argued that there was no evidence that he was the individual associated with terrorism in these databases. Nevertheless, in a final judgment of 3 November 2021, the Sofia City Administrative Court upheld the revocation of his residence permit, stating that it was “inadmissible” to verify the accuracy of the State Agency for National Security’s assertions. The court acknowledged the applicant’s family ties in Bulgaria, but found them insufficient to render the measure against him disproportionate. On an unspecified date the applicant left Bulgaria, thus separating from his wife. The applicant complains of violations of Article 8 of the Convention and Article 1 § 1 of Protocol No. 7. He challenges the Sofia City Administrative Court’s refusal to check the underlying data provided by the State Agency for National Security and to establish whether he genuinely posed a threat to national security. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to respect for his family life, within the meaning of Article   8 §   1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article   8 §   2? 2.     Did the decision to withdraw the applicant’s residence permit comply with the procedural requirements of Article   1 §   1 of Protocol No.   7?