CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 septembre 2017

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s52868F59 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:7.1pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 4 September 2017   THIRD SECTION Application no. 12030/16 Bakir Farukh Mohammed MIRAN against Russia lodged on 2 March 2016 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Mr Bakir Farukh Mohammed Miran, is an Iraqi national, who was born in 1984 and is detained in Klimovsk, Tula Region. He is represented before the Court by Ms D.V. Trenina and Ms   E.G. Davidyan, lawyers practising in Moscow. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. The applicant is a Sunni Muslim born in Baghdad. In 2007 together with his mother and brother he fled to Syria where he was granted refugee status by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). According to the applicant, he first came to Russia on 19   January 2009 having been admitted to the Tula Pedagogical University, where he met his girlfriend, E.K. He graduated in 2013 and continued to work as a hairdresser. In the meantime the situation in Syria began to deteriorate quickly, and in 2011 the applicant’s mother and brother had to return to Iraq. On 6   September 2012 his two brothers were allegedly arrested on charges of terrorism purportedly because of their belonging to Sunny Islam. They were subsequently released and charges against them were dropped, but the applicant’s family allegedly had to keep moving from place to place trying to hide during the Shia Militia raids. On 26 February 2015 the applicant’s mother bought him an apartment in Tula so that he could continue living in Russia. According to the applicant, he moved into the flat with E.K. In August 2015 the applicant’s passport expired. As he had to apply for a new one in person, he went to Iraq. Having applied for a new passport, he returned to Russia on 12 September 2015 on the basis of a tourist visa valid until 10   October 2015. At the same time he applied to the Russian Consulate in Iraq for a one-year business visa, which was eventually issued on 12   November 2015. According to the applicant, in September-October 2015 he repeatedly applied for a refugee status. However, his applications were not accepted for consideration “due to lack of quota for granting asylum” in the Tula Region. On 11 November 2015 the applicant was arrested in Tula because his visa had expired on 10   October 2015. On 12 November 2015 the Sovetskiy District Court of Tula found the applicant guilty of a breach of immigration rules (Article 18.8 of the Code on Administrative Offences), imposed on him a fine in the amount of 2,000   roubles and ordered his administrative removal. The applicant appealed. On 25   November 2015 the Tula Regional Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the decision on the applicant’s expulsion. The applicant submitted that he had left Iraq because he was afraid for his life and did not wish to fight against his people, which was dismissed by the court as uncorroborated. The court also stated that the applicant failed to present any evidence that he had close relatives who would either have Russian nationality or reside in Russia and that, accordingly, his removal from Russia would not interfere with his family life. On 14   December 2015 the applicant applied to the Federal Migration Service to be granted refugee status. According to him, the application was not accepted and the proceedings are not pending. On 25   December 2015 he applied to the UNHCR to be granted refugee status. On 12   January 2016 the applicant requested supervisory review of the decisions on his administrative removal of 12 and 25   November 2015. On 11   February 2016 the President of the Tula Regional Court dismissed the request for supervisory review. On 2   March 2016 the UNHCR informed the applicant’s representative that it had contacted the Russian Federal Migration Service and encouraged the latter to take all the necessary measures to secure the applicant’s right to seek asylum and to refrain from his removal while asylum proceedings are pending. The applicant is being held pending expulsion in Klimovsk special detention facility for foreign nationals. According to him, he has not been sent to Iraq yet because he does not have his Iraqi passport with him in the detention centre and refuses to provide it to the authorities. COMPLAINTS The applicant complains under Articles   5 §§   1   (f) and 4 of the Convention that his detention pending deportation has been too long and that Russian law does not provide for a judicial review of such detention.       QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant’s administrative removal been executed? If so, on what date?   2.     How long has the applicant been held in Klimovsk special detention facility for foreign nationals awaiting deportation?   3.     Has the applicant been deprived of his liberty in breach of Article   5 §   1 of the Convention? Has his detention been “lawful” within the meaning of paragraph   (f) of this provision (compare Mikolenko v.   Estonia , no.   10664/05, §§   59-68, 8   October 2009)?   4.     Did the applicant have at his disposal the procedure by which the lawfulness of his detention can be examined by a court and his release ordered, as required by Article   5 §   4 of the Convention?