Iniziamo la pubblicazione di sentenze della Corte Europea dei diritti dell’uomo per gentile segnalazione dell’International Commission of Jurist di Ginevra (a cura di M.Frigo)
Questa volta gli argomenti sono in materia di diritti alla vita familiare, al principio di non-refoulement e a questioni procedurali riguardanti la Convenzione Europea dei Diritti Umani.
(Siamo in attesa della sentenza della CEDU relativa ad un ricorso di giudici di pace di molti anni fa alla CEDU da parte di giudici di pace italiani…)
Qama c. Albanie et Italie (requête no 4604/09)
Le requérant, Flamur Qama, est un ressortissant albanais né en 1960 et résidant à Durrës (Albanie). Sa défunte épouse partit s’installer en Italie en 1999 avec leur fils, né en 1994. M. Qama les rejoignit ultérieurement. Après le décès de l’épouse de M. Qama, un tribunal italien confia en 2003 la garde de l’enfant à la belle-soeur de M. Qama, celui-ci ayant été renvoyé d’Italie en 2002 au motif qu’il n’avait pas de permis de séjour. Invoquant en particulier l’article 8 (droit au respect de la vie privée et familiale) de la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme, M. Qama se plaignait que les autorités albanaises et italiennes ne lui avaient pas garanti l’exercice de son droit de visite à l’égard de son fils, droit qui lui avait été accordé par deux décisions rendues par un tribunal albanais en 2006 et 2009.
Non-violation par l’Albanie de l’article 8
Grief contre l’Italie déclaré irrecevable
Judgment in English/sentenza in inglese: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-115854
——————–
B.Z. v. Sweden (no. 74352/11) (striking-out)
The applicant, B.Z., is an Eritrean national who was born in 1942. Having arrived in Sweden in April 2006, he applied for asylum, submitting that he had been imprisoned in Eritrea for being unable to inform the authorities of the whereabouts of his sons who had allegedly deserted from military service, and that he had been beaten in prison. His asylum request having been rejected in a decision upheld by the Swedish Migration Court in November 2011, he alleged that he would face treatment in breach of Article 2 (right to life) and Article 3 (prohibition of torture and of inhuman or degrading treatment) if forced to return to Eritrea.
The Court decided, under Article 37 § 1 (c), to strike the application out of its list of cases (the validity of the deportation order against the applicant having expired, he may institute a new asylum request)
Just satisfaction: The Cour dismissed the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction.
Judgment in English/sentenza in inglese: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-115386
————————-
F.N. and Others v. Sweden (no. 28774/09)
The applicants, Mr F.N., his wife and their two minor children, are Uzbek nationals who were born in 1960, 1970, 1998 and 2006 respectively. Having arrived in Sweden in December 2005, they applied for asylum and residence permits, submitting that Mr and Ms N. had been persecuted in Uzbekistan. In particular, Mr N. had been tortured following his participation in a demonstration in Andijan in May 2005. Their request for asylum and residence permits having been rejected by the Swedish Migration Board in a decision eventually upheld in June 2009, the applicants complained that if deported to Uzbekistan they would be persecuted, arrested, ill-treated and maybe even killed. They also alleged that one of the couple’s children was in very poor health and would not receive proper medical treatment in Uzbekistan. They relied on Article 3 (prohibition of torture and of inhuman or degrading treatment).
Violation of Article 3 (in the event of the applicants’ deportation to Uzbekistan)
The Court also decided to continue its indication to the Government (made under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court) that the applicant should not be extradited until the judgment became final or until further order.
Just satisfaction: EUR 4,500 (costs and expenses) to the applicants jointly.
Judgment in English/sentenza in inglese: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-115396
————————-
P.Z. and Others v. Sweden (no. 68194/10) (striking-out)
The applicants, P.Z. and her two children, are Afghan nationals who were born in 1975, 1995 and 2004 respectively. Having arrived in Sweden in May 2007, joining P.Z.’s husband and their other children who had arrived there earlier, they applied for asylum, alleging that in Afghanistan the family had been persecuted by the Taliban. The applicants’ asylum request having been rejected in a decision upheld by the Swedish Migration Court of Appeal in June 2010, they alleged that they would face treatment in breach of Article 3 (prohibition of torture and of inhuman or degrading treatment) if forced to return to Afghanistan.
The Court decided, under Article 37 § 1 (c), to strike the application out of its list of cases (the validity of the deportation order against the applicants having expired, they may institute a new asylum request)
Just satisfaction: EUR 2,000 (costs and expenses) to the applicants jointly.
Judgment in English/Sentenza in inglese: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-115385
