CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 novembre 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 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left }   Communicated on 13 November 2017   FOURTH SECTION Application no.   18531/17 H.K. against Hungary lodged on 3 March 2017 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the expulsion of an irregular migrant from Hungary to Serbia without the examination of his personal circumstances and his arguments against the measure. The applicant, an Iranian citizen who converted to Christianity and fled the country due to religious persecution, clandestinely crossed the border fence between Hungary and Serbia together with another Iranian migrant in September 2016, but they were apprehended by the police. Without establishing their identity or paying heed to the applicant’s requests for asylum, and without any formal judicial or administrative decision, the police transported them back to the border fence and expulsed them to Serbia through a gate on the fence. The applicant is currently staying in Germany as an asylum seeker.   QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Was the applicant, an alien in the respondent State, expelled as part of a collective measure, in breach of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4?   2.     Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy for his complaint under Article 4 of Protocol No. 4, as required by Article   13 of the Convention?