FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 52239/99
by Mohammed KHADJAWI
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section) sitting on 6 January 2000 as a Chamber composed of
MrM.Pellonpää, President,
MrG.Ress,
MrA.Pastor Ridruejo,
MrL.Caflisch,
MrJ.Makarczyk,
MrV.Butkevych,
MrJ. Hedigan, judges,
andMrV. Berger, Section Registrar;
Having regard to Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
Having regard to the application introduced on 29 October 1999 by Mohammed Khadjawi against Turkey and registered on 29 October 1999 under file no. 52239/99;
Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 49 of the Rules of Court;
Having regard to the information submitted by the respondent Government on 14 December 1999 and the letter received from the applicant’s representative on 21 December 1999;
Having deliberated;
Decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant is an Iranian national, born in 1954 and at present living in the Netherlands.
He is represented before the Court by Ms Gerda Later, a lawyer practising in The Hague, the Netherlands.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
The applicant’s wife applied for asylum in the Netherlands on 30 April 1995 and was granted refugee status on 21 August 1996. In May 1998 the applicant fled Iran and entered Turkey illegally. In July 1998 the applicant’s wife filed a request for an entry visa on his behalf with the Dutch authorities. On 10 March 1999 the Dutch authorities recognised the applicant as a refugee and instructed the Dutch consular authorities in Turkey to issue him a visa. However, as the applicant had entered Turkey illegally he was unable to obtain an exit visa. In order to remedy this the vice-consul at the Dutch consulate-general in Istanbul advised the applicant to report himself to the authorities which he did at the beginning of October 1999. The Turkish authorities decided that the applicant would not be fined for his illegal entry and that his papers would be sent to the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Meanwhile, the applicant was to report to the police every week. On 25 October 1999, the applicant’s wife received news that her husband had been arrested and would be deported to Iran.
The applicant was released on 15 November 1999 and was allowed to travel to the Netherlands on 9 December 1999.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention that his expulsion from Turkey to Iran would subject him to a real risk of treatment contrary to those provisions.
PROCEDURE
The application was introduced on 29 October 1999 and registered the same day.
Also on that day the President of the Fourth Section of the Court decided to apply Rule 39 of the Rules of Court and indicated to the Turkish Government that it was desirable in the interests of the parties and the proper conduct of the proceedings before the Court not to expel the applicant to Iran until the competent Chamber’s next meeting. On 9 November 1999 the Chamber constituted to consider the application decided to prolong until further notice the interim measure indicated under Rule 39.
On 29 November 1999 a number of questions were put to the respondent Government pursuant to Rule 49 § 2 (a). In their reply of 14 December 1999 the Government submitted that the applicant had left Turkey on 9 December 1999 on board a flight to the Netherlands.
On 21 December 1999 the applicant confirmed the information provided by the respondent Government and informed the Court that he did not intend to pursue the application.
THE LAW
The Court notes that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application as the matter of which he complained has been resolved. Moreover, the Court considers that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention does not require it to continue with the examination of the application.
It follows that the application may be struck off the list of cases pursuant to Article 37 § 1 (a and b) of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OUT OF ITS LIST OF CASES.
Vincent Berger Matti Pellonpää
Registrar President
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy