CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 21 septembre 2012

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s3E839E41 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:30pt; text-align:center } .sDA30A789 { margin-top:30pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:center } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3B3A5DE9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC1B78D0 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:36pt; text-align:justify } .sACBC61AB { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:36pt; text-align:justify } .s8F345D62 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:36pt; text-align:justify; font-size:14pt } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }       DEUXIÈME SECION Application no. 60119/12 Z.H. and R.H. against Switzerland lodged on 18 September 2012 STATEMENT OF FACTS FACTS The applicants are Afghan Nationals who resided illegally in Iran. They arrived in Switzerland in September 2011, coming from Italy where they have been registered as asylum seekers. Since the applicants could not produce a certificate of marriage and the female applicant was only 14 years old when married, the national authorities decided that due to the failure of proof of a family life the cases had to be treated separately. Based on the Dublin II Regulations the male applicant’s request for asylum was dismissed and he was expelled to Italy. However, he returned shortly afterwards to Switzerland where is now residing illegally. The female applicant’s request for asylum is still pending. COMPLAINTS Relying on Article 3 of the Convention the applicants claim that the already executed expulsion of the male applicant had traumatic effects upon them. They allege that if he were expelled again before the female applicant’s request for asylum was resolved in Switzerland the repeated trauma would amount to ill-treatment according to Article 3 of the Convention. Relying on Article 8 of the Convention the applicants allege that their right to respect their family life was violated if they were expulsed separately. Relying on Article 13 of the Convention, the applicants claim that they do not have an effective remedy at national level to enforce their rights under Article 3 and 8 of the Convention.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES   Has there been an interference with the applicants’ right to respect their private and family life, within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention?   If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article 8   §   2 of the Convention?