Decision No. 517/2000 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||517/2000|
|Other Languages / Attachments||Greek|
|Cite as||Decision No. 517/2000 of the Committee of Injunctions of the Council of State, 517/2000, Greece: Council of State, 2000, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3f4f93284.html [accessed 24 July 2014]|
|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 Turkish national and came illegally into Greece without any travel documents. Before the authorities, he claimed, producing relevant documentation, that he is an ethnic Kurd, active member of P.R.K. working as a fundraiser for the party and coordinating the propaganda distribution network of the major cities of Turkey. He left the country because he was informed that his activities and real identity became known to the Turkish authorities and that his arrest was imminent. His application for asylum was rejected at first instance; he appealed before the Minister of Public Order against this negative decision. Though the Appeals' Board (art. 3 para. 5 of P.D. 61/99) unanimously advised in favor of granting refugee status, the Minister rejected his application and gave him 3 months notice to leave the country. The Applicant appealed against this negative decision before the Council of State, applying also for temporary judicial protection.
Reasoning and decision:
A) The Committee took note of art. 52 para. 8 of P.D. 18/1989 stipulating that: ".. besides suspension of enforcement, the Committee may order any other adequate measure, without being bound by the parties submissions". It interpreted this provision as granting the Committee the right not only to suspend enforcement of an act but also to order other measures for the protection of the applicant's interests in case the act might cause irreparable damage to him, but, given the nature of the act, as is the case with a negative decision, an injunction to suspend enforcement is not feasible.
B) The Minister's negative decision under appeal, being a negative act, cannot receive suspension of enforcement. Taking note, though, of the Applicant's claim on the facts of his case, that were not challenged by the Administration and were even received by the a/m Appeals Board, the Applicant's return to Turkey would cause him irreparable damage to his security and freedom, in case the Council of State finally annulled the said act. Furthermore, even if it were possible to expel him to a third country – though he had no travel documents – the Applicant would face an interruption of his working relations in Greece, since for 2 years he works as a journalist.
C) It also took into account art. 2 para. 7 of P.D. 61\99 and ruled that the Administration should return to the Applicant the special asylum seeker's residence permit, so as to restitute the status quo ante the Minister's negative decision.
The Committee ordered the Administration to refrain, till such time as the final ruling of the Council of State on the said case is issued, from any act that might be founded on the Ministerial Decision under appeal and might lead to the Applicant's forced departure from Greece.