Application No. 23662/94
by Ibrahim ÜNVER and Sana ISSA
against Sweden
The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on
20 February 1995, the following members being present:
MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President
H. DANELIUS
C.L. ROZAKIS
G. JÖRUNDSSON
S. TRECHSEL
A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK
A. WEITZEL
J.-C. SOYER
H.G. SCHERMERS
Mrs. G.H. THUNE
Mr. F. MARTINEZ
Mrs. J. LIDDY
MM. L. LOUCAIDES
J.-C. GEUS
M.P. PELLONPÄÄ
B. MARXER
M.A. NOWICKI
I. CABRAL BARRETO
B. CONFORTI
I. BÉKÉS
J. MUCHA
D. SVÁBY
E. KONSTANTINOV
G. RESS
Mr. H.C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission
Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection
of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
Having regard to the application introduced on 7 March 1994 by
Ibrahim ÜNVER and Sana ISSA against Sweden and registered on 14 March
1994 under file No. 23662/94;
Having regard to :
- the reports provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of
the Commission;
- the Commission's decision of 11 March 1994 to request information
from the respondent Government;
- the information provided by the respondent Government on
19 April 1994 and the comments in reply submitted by the
applicants on 25 May 1994;
- the Commission's decision of 10 October 1994 to request further
information from the respondent Government;
- the information provided by the respondent Government on
28 October 1994;
Having deliberated;
Decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants, husband and wife, were born in 1962 and 1968,
respectively. They are allegedly stateless. They are currently living
in Sweden and are represented by Mr. Leif Rydberg, a lawyer in
Bergshamra.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be
summarised as follows.
The wife entered Sweden on 10 October 1990. She stated to the
police that in August 1990 six masked men had come to look for her
husband in their home in Lebanon in order to persuade him to join one
of the fighting militias. The husband had been absent at the time and
the persons had then attempted to rape her. She had screamed for help
and an armed neighbour had come to her rescue, threatening to shoot the
attackers, who then left.
The husband entered Sweden on 26 December 1990. He stated that
in the beginning of 1990 his barber shop had been burned down because
he had refused to support ex-General Aoun's forces. Both applicants had
allegedly been harassed, assaulted and otherwise persecuted for being
Christians.
Both applicants entered Sweden on false passports, claiming that
they have never been given a Lebanese passport due to their lack of
citizenship. Their parents allegedly originated from Turkey and were
of Assyrian origin.
On 13 June 1991 the National Immigration Board (statens
invandrarverk) rejected the applicants' request for asylum or residence
permits, considering, notably, that the general situation in Lebanon
was not such that asylum should be granted. The applicants were ordered
to be expelled to Lebanon, although their citizenship was considered
to be unknown.
On 5 June 1992 the National Immigration Board's decision was
upheld by the Aliens' Appeals Board (utlänningsnämnden).
On 15 September 1992 the applicants lodged a further request for
asylum or residence permits, referring to the alleged arrest and
disappearance of an asylum seeker returned from Sweden to Lebanon.
On 17 September 1992 the applicants' further request was rejected
by the National Immigration Board.
Pending an investigation of the applicants' possible citizenship
the expulsion order has not yet been enforced.
COMPLAINTS
The applicants complain about their possibly forthcoming
expulsion to Lebanon, where they fear they would be subjected to
further persecution, possibly with a deadly result. They refer to the
persecution of Christians by the Muslim-dominated Syrian rulers of
Lebanon. They also assert that stateless persons of Turkish origin
cannot receive Lebanese citizenship and related rights. The applicants
have allegedly also been forced to perform activities in support of
General Aoun's forces. Such supporters may still be arrested in
Lebanon. The applicants finally refer to the second applicant's severe
asthma and chronic bronchitis. They invoke Articles 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10,
13 and 14 of the Convention.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION
The application was introduced on 7 March 1994 and registered on
14 March 1994.
On 11 March 1994 the Commission decided to request information
from the respondent Government, pursuant to Rule 48 para. 2 (a) of the
Rules of Procedure.
The information requested by the Commission was submitted by the
Government on 19 April 1994. The applicants submitted comments in reply
on 25 May 1994 after an extension of their time-limit.
On 10 October 1994 the Commission decided to request further
information from the respondent Government.
The information requested by the Commission was submitted by the
Government on 28 October 1994.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
The Commission notes the respondent Government's statement that
there are no plans to attempt to enforce the expulsion order concerning
the applicants, since it has not been possible to establish their true
identities and nationalities. The Commission finds, pursuant to Article
30 para. 1 (c) of the Convention, that it is no longer justified to
continue the examination of their petition. It furthermore finds no
special circumstances regarding respect for Human Rights, as defined
in the Convention, which require the continuation of the examination
of the application.
The Commission recalls, however, that under Article 30 para. 3
of the Convention it may decide to restore a petition to its list of
cases if it considers that the circumstances justify such a course.
For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,
DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES.
Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission
(H.C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy