Communicated on 12 November 2018
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 46697/18
K.T. and Z.K.
against Poland
lodged on 10 October 2018
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicants lodged an application for international protection in Poland. They informed the Polish authorities that K.T. and his brother were members of a political party in Tajikistan. Owing to this fact, they had been persecuted by the Tajik authorities. According to the information presented in the request, K.T. had been summoned for questioning on many occasions and he had been severely beaten.
In 2016 the head of the Polish Office for Foreigners (Urząd do Spraw Cudzoziemców) declined to grant the applicants refugee status. The applicants lodged an appeal; that appeal was dismissed.
In 2017 the applicants lodged another application for international protection. The Warsaw Commander of the National Border Guards issued a decision requiring the applicants to return to Tajikistan and imposing a ban on their re-entry. This deportation decision become final; however, the applicants left Poland. Accordingly, the Polish authorities decided to discontinue the proceedings owing to the applicants’ departure from Poland.
In 2018 the applicants were transferred to Poland under the “Dublin III Regulation” (Recommendation C(2016)8525 adopted on 8 December 2016). They were placed in the Guarded Centre for Foreigners.
The applicants again lodged an application for international protection in Poland, claiming that K.T. faced a risk of imprisonment in Tajikistan. The applicants also submitted that K.T. had been unlawfully arrested and tortured in Tajikistan. Moreover, his brother had been granted refugee status.
The head of the Polish Office for Foreigners found the new application inadmissible. He held that the applicants had lodged a fresh application for international protection without submitting any new evidence. He underlined that the applicants’ statements had not been credible, as K.T.’s submissions as regards his political activities were not supported by corroborating documents. The head of the Polish Office for Foreigners accordingly concluded that there was no evidence that the applicants would face a risk of ill‑treatment after their expulsion. The applicants lodged an appeal against this decision; the proceedings in question are pending before the second-instance authority.
Moreover, the applicants’ representative asked the authorities to re‑open the proceedings that had ended with the delivery of the decision requiring the applicants to return to Tajikistan along and imposing a ban on their re-entry. The authorities declined to re-open the proceedings. The applicants’ representative appealed, requesting that the applicants’ expulsion be stayed. The proceedings in question are pending before the second-instance authority.
By a decision of 11 October 2018 the Court (that is to say the duty judge) decided, in the interests of the parties and in order to ensure the proper conduct of the proceedings before it, to indicate to the Government, under Rule 39, that the applicants should not be expelled before 12 November 2018. The Court considered that further information was required and invited the parties to submit the documents relating to the domestic proceedings. Furthermore, the Court decided to ask the parties to answer to the following question: taking into account the applicant’s (K.T.’s) political activity as a member of the political party, does he face a risk of being a victim of ill-treatment if expelled to Tajikistan?
The applicants were released from the Guarded Centre for Foreigners in October 2018 and placed in an open centre.
QUESTION
Having regard in particular to K.T.’s political activity in Tajikistan, would the applicants’ expulsion to Tajikistan amount to a violation of Article 3 of the Convention?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy