Communicated on 28 June 2016
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 17137/10
Angelina Robertovna ANDROSYAN
against Russia
lodged on 16 March 2010
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicant, Ms Angelina Robertovna Androsyan, is a Russian national, who was born in 1984 and lives in Moscow.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
The applicant was born in Tbilisi, at the time the Soviet Socialist Republic of Georgia.
On unspecified date she moved to Russia with her parents.
On 10 February 1999 the applicant was issued with an insert (“вкладыш”) for her Soviet passport specifying that she was a citizen of the Russian Federation.
On 19 March 2002 the applicant was issued with a Russian internal passport.
On 30 October 2007, when the applicant applied for exchange of her passport due to its expiry, the Krasnogorsk Department of the Interior seized her Russian passport on the ground that it had been unduly issued.
The applicant complained to a court.
On 15 April 2009 the Zamoskvoretskiy District Court of Moscow dismissed her complaint. The court referred to the findings of an internal check which had established certain irregularities in the issue of passports by the Krasnogorsk Department of the Interior, which included the applicant’s passport. It also noted that no documents corroborating the applicant’s place of residence prior to 2002 had been found in the archives, which proved that her passport had been unduly issued.
On 17 September 2009 the Moscow City Court upheld the judgment on appeal.
On 6 November 2009 the Moscow City Court and on 1 February 2010 the Supreme Court of Russia dismissed the applicant’s requests for supervisory review.
B. Relevant domestic law and practice
For a summary of the relevant domestic law and practice see Dzhalagoniya v. Russia, no. 33330/11, communicated on 19 December 2013.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complains about the seizure of her passport and de facto revocation of her Russian citizenship. She contends that without a valid passport she cannot exercise her fundamental rights, including the right to freedom of movement, as she is even unable to buy train tickets.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to respect for her private life within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention? (see Smirnova v. Russia, nos. 46133/99 and 48183/99, § 97, ECHR 2003-IX).
2. If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention?
3. The applicant is requested to inform the Court of the date when she moved to Russia and to provide details of her places of residence in Russia.
4. The Government are requested to provide the Court with the following documents:
(i) a copy of the report on the internal check which established that the applicant’s passport had been unduly issued; and
(ii) a copy of the report on seizure of her passport.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy