Decision No. 389/1992 of the Committee of Injunctions of the Council of State
|Publisher||Greece: Council of State|
|Author||Council of State (Committee of Injunctions)|
|Citation / Document Symbol||389/1992|
|Other Languages / Attachments||Greek|
|Cite as||Decision No. 389/1992 of the Committee of Injunctions of the Council of State, 389/1992, Greece: Council of State, 1992, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3f4f91034.html [accessed 29 January 2015]|
|Comments||This is a summary in English provided by UNHCR Athens.|
|Disclaimer||This is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of UNHCR, the United Nations or its Member States.|
Summary of facts: The Applicant is a Sri Lankan national. The Ministry of Public Order did not renew his residence permit in Greece and ordered the police authorities to force him to leave the country, for reasons of public interest. The Applicant appealed against this decision alleging risk of life, due to his ethnic origin, if he returned to his country of origin.
Reasoning and decision: The Committee confirmed its constant opinion that, when a prohibition for an alien to remain in Greece is justified on reasons of public order, the decision ordering his departure can only have a suspensory effect when the interested person can produce particularly exceptional reasons relating to specific risk for his life/security/freedom. In the case under judgment, the Committee deemed that the Applicant did not face such a danger since the decision against which he appealed did not order his return to his country of origin but only his departure from Greece to a third country for reasons of public interest. The Appeal was rejected.
Note: The Applicant returned with a new injunction to suspend application of the decision, producing a supplementary certificate from UNHCR, attesting that he was a mandate refugee and had in the past tried unsuccessfully to resettle to a third country. The Appeal was again rejected (574/1992).