PAKETOVA AND OTHERS v. BULGARIA

Published on 15 April 2024

THIRD SECTION

Application no. 43381/20
Anka Delkova PAKETOVA and Others
against Bulgaria
lodged on 25 August 2020
communicated on 25 March 2024

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

1.  The six applicants, all of Roma ethnic origin, hail from the village of Voyvodinovo. They fled from that village on 6 or 7 January 2019 as a result of protests against its Roma inhabitants by the rest of its population. The general circumstances of their case have been set out in Paketova and Others v. Bulgaria (nos. 17808/19 and 36972/19, §§ 5-87, 4 October 2022).

2.  The present application concerns twelve orders, issued by the mayor on 16 January 2019, to demolish buildings said to be inhabited by them.

3.  The applicants sought judicial review of those orders. Three of them challenged more than one order because they were uncertain which one related to which building. In twelve judgments given in May-July 2019, the Plovdiv Administrative Court dismissed their claims.

4.  The applicants appealed against each of those judgments, but on various dates ranging between November 2019 and July 2020, the Supreme Administrative Court upheld them.

5.  The applicants complain under Article 8 of the Convention, alone and in conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention, that the demolition orders were unlawful and unjustified, and were in reality motivated by their Roma ethnic origin. They further complain under Article 18 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 8 that the authorities ordered the demolition of their homes chiefly with a view to ethnically cleansing their village. Lastly, they complain that the demolition was in breach of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, alone and in conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1.  Is Article 8 of the Convention applicable? In particular, were the buildings to which the demolition orders related the applicants’ homes, within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention (in the light of, in particular, the rulings of the Bulgarian courts on the point and the arguments and evidence that the applicants submitted before them in relation to that)?

2.  If so, were the orders to demolish those buildings in breach of Article 8 of the Convention, taken alone or in conjunction with Article 14 (see Yordanova and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 25446/06, §§ 107-44, 24 April 2012; Ivanova and Cherkezov v. Bulgaria, no. 46577/15, §§ 53-55, 21 April 2016; and Simonova v. Bulgaria, no. 30782/16, § 48, 11 April 2023)? In particular, were those buildings the applicants’ only homes?

3.  Did the alleged interference with the applicants’ rights under Article 8 of the Convention pursue, solely or predominantly, a purpose other than those prescribed in the Convention, contrary to Article 18 (see, mutatis mutandis, Kogan and Others v. Russia, no. 54003/20, §§ 67-78, 7 March 2023)?

APPENDIX