CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 26 avril 2011

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 140 April 2011 M. v. Switzerland - 41199/06 Judgment 26.4.2011 [Section II] Article 8 Article 8-1 Respect for family life Respect for private life Refusal to renew expatriate’s passport for over six years with a view to forcing his return home to stand trial: no violation   Facts – The applicant had been living in Thailand for a number of years. The Swiss Embassy issued him with a new passport in 1997 and renewed it in 2003. In October 2004, before his passport expired, he applied for a new one, which he needed because he intended to marry a Thai national. The application was forwarded to the Federal Police Office (Fedpol) in Switzerland, which found that the applicant had been listed in a police database since June 2003 as being wanted for fraud. Fedpol contacted the public prosecutor’s office, which opposed the renewal of the passport. Only a “ laissez-passer ” permitting his direct return to Switzerland could be issued. In November 2004 the Swiss Embassy in Bangkok informed the applicant. None of his appeals against that decision was successful. Law – Article 8: The applicant was living abroad and the fact that he had no valid identity document placed him in a delicate situation vis-à-vis the Thai authorities and was likely to be a source of problems in his everyday life, particularly administrative problems – for example, if he wanted to marry a Thai national or register a child born out of wedlock in Thailand with the Swiss authorities. The authorities’ refusal to renew the applicant’s passport thus constituted an interference with his private and family life. The impugned measure was provided for by law, with the aim of guaranteeing the proper conduct of criminal proceedings against the applicant. He had been living without a valid passport since October 2004, that is, more than six years, which was a long time. He must have been aware, however, that he was under investigation for fraud, a criminal offence under Swiss law. By refusing to return to Switzerland he was intentionally avoiding prosecution. The competent authorities had therefore preferred not to renew his passport, in order to make him return to Switzerland, considering that his presence there was necessary for the proper conduct of the criminal proceedings against him. In view of the medical certificates he had submitted, they also considered that the applicant was in good enough health to travel to Switzerland. Furthermore, the refusal to issue the applicant with a new passport was less severe than other measures the authorities could have taken. In the light of the detailed and reasoned decisions of the Swiss authorities and regard being had to the importance, in the public interest, of combating crime, the refusal to issue the applicant with a new passport was, in the circumstances of the case, proportionate to the aim pursued. Conclusion : no violation (unanimously).   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes