THIRD SECTION
Application no. 29664/13
Yahye Ahmed Olad JIAMILE
against the Netherlands
lodged on 3 May 2013
STATEMENT OF FACTS
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Yahye Ahmed Olad Jiamile, is a citizen of Somalia. He was born in 1989 and is currently staying in the Netherlands. He is represented before the Court by Mr P.J. Schüller, a lawyer practising in Amsterdam.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
On 22 January 2008 the applicant applied for asylum in the Netherlands. On 13 May 2009 he received a negative decision. The applicant appealed this decision.
On 29 September 2010 the applicant applied for a second time for asylum in the Netherlands. He received his final negative decision on 31 May 2011.
On 18 December 2012 action was taken aimed at the applicant’s effective removal (feitelijke uitzettingshandeling) and an entry ban (inreisverbod) imposed on him. The applicant objected against this decision. On 26 March 2013 he received his final negative decision.
On 19 April 2013 again action was taken aimed at the applicant’s effective removal. On 25 April 2013 the applicant filed an objection (bezwaar tegen feitelijke uitzettingshandeling) with the Deputy Minister of Security and Justice (staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie) against the fresh decision to expel him on 11 May 2013. He also requested a provisional measure from the Regional Court of The Hague sitting in Haarlem (rechtbank), to the effect that he would be allowed to await the outcome of the objection proceedings in the Netherlands. On 7 May 2013 the Regional Court rejected the request for a provisional measure.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention that there are substantial grounds for believing that he will be subjected to treatment prohibited by that provision if he were expelled to Somalia.
QUESTIONs
1. Is it the Government’s intention to expel the applicant to Mogadishu? If so, for what reasons do the Government believe that the violence in Mogadishu is no longer of such a level of intensity that anyone in the city, except possibly those who are exceptionally well-connected to “powerful actors”, would be at real risk of treatment prohibited by Article 3 of the Convention (see Sufi and Elmi v. the United Kingdom, nos. 8319/07 and 11449/07, § 293, 28 June 2011)? Would the applicant personally be at risk of such treatment if expelled to Mogadishu?
2. Alternatively, is there an internal flight alternative elsewhere in southern and central Somalia that the applicant could travel to, to which he could gain admittance and where he could settle without being exposed to a real risk of Article 3 ill-treatment (see Sufi and Elmi, cited above, § 294)?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy