FOURTH SECTION
Application no. 14491/13
V.J.
against Finland
lodged on 26 February 2013
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicant, Mr V.J., is an Angolan national, who was born in 1989. He is represented before the Court by Mr Pirkka Lappalainen, a lawyer practising in Tampere.
The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
1. Account of the events provided by the applicant
The applicant is a 24-year-old single male from Angola. He originates from Kakongo city in Cabinda province. His whole family belonged to the FLEC-FAC -party (Frente de Libertacao do Estado de Cabinda - Forcas Armadas de Cabinda) supporting and fighting for the independence of Cabinda. His parents were killed by the Angolan security forces when he was three years’ old. The applicant together with his brother and sister moved to live with his uncle and uncle’s wife after the incident. The applicant’s uncle had an important role in the FLEC-FAC being the representative of the party and coordinating its activities in their neighbourhood. The uncle was held for approximately two years in the Yabi prison when the applicant was still in school. The applicant was also a member of the party, but his activities within the party were minor, mostly limited to distributing leaflets.
The applicant described his problems with the authorities as first starting when he was around 14 years old (in 2003). He was selling tinned food at the market when he ended up having a disagreement with some buyer, who subsequently reported him to the police alleging that he was conspiring to kill an important army colonel. The applicant was apparently held for a long time (around 2 years) in detention without a trial, but eventually his uncle managed to buy his release. The conditions in detention were extremely poor and he also claimed to have been beaten and stripped naked.
The events that led to his flight from Angola happened in late 2008. When returning home after the working day at the market the applicant found that his uncle, brother and sister had been killed in the house. His uncle’s wife and his own common-law wife who was also living in the same house at the time had disappeared. The applicant has not had any information about them ever since. He heard that some people from his village had managed to escape to the Democratic Republic of Congo and suspected that maybe his spouse and his uncle’s wife were with those people. Subsequently, the applicant was taken by the FAA (Angolan Armed Forces) soldiers to unknown location where some 15 other persons were held. The applicant was questioned about the whereabouts of his uncle’s documents concerning FLEC-FAC and ill-treated by the soldiers. He was beaten on the head with the end of the rifle, beaten and burned on his feet, shot in his leg and the surface of his chest cut with a knife. Approximately five or six days later he managed to escape together with another FLEC‑FAC activist who had also been held captive. The applicant walked back to his village and went to see the local priest who helped him to flee Angola. He stayed for a while with the friend of the priest and in a church in Luanda and eventually the priest organised his escape through a smuggler. The applicant flew to Moscow and travelled by car to Finland where he arrived on 17 April 2009.
On 10 July 2009 a general physician examined the applicant. The applicant had already been hospitalized in May and June 2009 for epileptic attacks which were at first diagnosed as psychogenic or caused by ill‑treatment to the head. The general physician reported scarring on several locations on the applicant’s body and diagnosed him suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. He referred the applicant to the Centre for Torture Survivors in Finland (Kidutettujen kuntoutuskeskus, Centret för rehabilitering av tortyroffer) for further examination and treatment. The applicant was examined on two occasions, on 3 December 2009 and 13 January 2010 respectively, by the physiotherapist of the Centre for Torture Survivors who reported that the applicant had altogether six visible scars on his body. Two 1-3 cm long scars were found in his forehead and half of his front teeth were missing, other scars were detected in his chest, leg and feet all matching his description of torture inflicted on him. The applicant complained also chest pain and difficulties of breathing from time to time, which he claimed to have been caused by kicks to his chest. He was also very sensitive to touching in general which the physician concluded to be most likely a psychological symptom of ill-treatment. The applicant has had therapy visits with both the psychiatrist and the psychologist of the Centre for Torture Survivors from 27 November 2009 at least until December 2012. In their various medical reports the psychiatrist and the psychologist concluded that the applicant’s psychological condition was consistent with him having experienced severe and multilayered traumas, such as his claim of having been tortured and having experienced the killing of his family. The psychiatrist diagnosed the applicant with severe depression and post-traumatic stress disorder and reported him suffering also from slight memory problems. His symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder and his memory problems were eased during the treatment and the applicant managed to start studies in Finland. From 27 to 29 August 2011 the applicant was again hospitalised due to severe epileptic attacks occurring despite medication. He was referred to a neurologist for a follow-up.
As from the end of October 2012 the applicant was reported to be suicidal and was shortly admitted to acute mental care.
2. Asylum proceedings
On 17 April 2009 the applicant sought asylum immediately when arriving in Finland.
On 27 May 2010 the Finnish Immigration Service (Maahanmuuttovirasto, Migrationsverket) rejected his application and decided to expel him back to Angola. In its decision the Immigration Service referred extensively and in detail to the applicant’s asylum interview and found several discrepancies in his story. It noted that on some occasions the applicant gave exact dates and on other occasions he could not place the events in at a specific moment in time. The Immigration Service found the applicant’s story of his escape, in a wounded state, from the FAA soldiers to be unlikely and incredible. The Immigration Service concluded that as there were such credibility issues, the applicant’s scars could have been caused by other means than the torture claimed by him. It also doubted whether the applicant was from the Cabinda province.
The applicant appealed to the Administrative Court (hallinto-oikeus, förvaltningsdomstolen), requesting that the Immigration Service’s decision be quashed and he be granted asylum, or alternatively, secondary protection or a residence permit due to individual humanitarian circumstances. He also requested that an oral hearing be held. The applicant submitted also to the court several new medical certificates, noting that it was common that such traumas as torture and epilepsy inflict negatively on a person’s memory and ability to recount events consistently.
On 19 August 2011 the Administrative Court rejected the applicant’s appeal and refused his request for an oral hearing as unnecessary. It noted, however, that the discrepancies in the applicant’s story were minor and of such kind that they did not give reason to doubt his origins from Cabinda. On the other hand, the Administrative Court did not consider it likely that the applicant would have been arrested and tortured after the rest of the family had been killed. The applicant’s previous arrest when he was 14 years old seemed to be unconnected with later events. The Administrative Court considered furthermore, that it was not likely that the Angolan officials would be interested in the applicant now that his uncle was already dead. Although the human rights situation in Cabinda was not very satisfactory, it concluded that the applicant could be expelled there without a real risk of ill-treatment.
The applicant appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court (korkein hallinto-oikeus, högsta förvaltningsdomstolen).
On 12 October 2012 the Supreme Administrative Court refused the applicant leave to appeal. The applicant was notified of the decision on 30 October 2012.
On 21 December 2012 the applicant lodged a new asylum application, referring to the same grounds as in his first application. He also submitted new medical certificates, arguing that his current state of health prevented his removal or that removal to Angola would amount to inhuman treatment as no treatment would be available for him there. He also submitted certificates of his studies in Finland and relied on them as grounds for residence permit.
On 15 January 2013 the Immigration Service rejected the application after having examined it in a fast-track procedure and decided to expel him to Angola. It also imposed on the applicant a two-year-ban on entry to Finland and the Schengen-area. The Immigration Service considered that the applicant’s situation had not changed from the previous application and there were no grounds for a residence permit or grounds preventing the applicant’s removal to Angola. It noted that the situation in Cabinda area had calmed down, even though some attacks were still reported between the Angolan army and some rebel groups (of the FLEC-FAC). However, the applicant could relocate internally to other parts of Angola if he wished. As for his health, the Immigration Service noted that there was mental care available in Angola, although a shortage of medical staff in general was reported. ¨Post-traumatic stress disorder could be treated in one private clinic in Luanda. The treatment of epilepsy was not mentioned.
The applicant appealed to Administrative Court, requesting also that a stay on removal be granted.
On 7 February 2013 the Administrative Court notified the applicant that the request for interim measure had been refused. The applicant’s appeal before the Administrative Court is still pending.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complains under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention that if expelled to Angola, he would face a real risk of ill-treatment and/or his life would be seriously endangered. Also his state of health is currently so poor that it alone would amount to inhuman treatment if removed to Angola and to put his life into danger as no treatment would be available for him there.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. In the light of the applicant’s claims and the documents which have been submitted, would he face a risk of being subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention if he is expelled?
2. In particular, in deciding on his expulsion, did the authorities give proper consideration to the applicant’s medical certificates submitted to the Administrative Court and take them into account in the assessment of risk in the applicant’s case?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy