issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 187 (2017)
08.06.2017
Judgments and decisions of 8 June 2017
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing ten judgments1 and 27 decisions2:
one Chamber judgment is summarised below; a separate press release has been issued for one
other Chamber judgment in the case of National Turkish Union and Kungyun v. Bulgaria (application
no. 4776/08);
eight Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been submitted to the Court, and
The judgment below is available only in French.
M.M. v. Bulgaria (application no. 75832/13)
The applicant, M.M., is a stateless person of Palestinian origin. He was born in 1991 in Damascus and
lives in Sofia.
M.M. arrived in Bulgaria on 22 July 2008. After rejecting his two applications for refugee status, the
Refugees’ Agency granted him humanitarian status. He was issued with a residence permit.
By an order of 13 July 2013 the National Security Agency withdrew M.M.’s residence permit and
ordered his expulsion, together with a ten-year entry ban, on the grounds that his presence in the
country posed a threat to national security. A separate order was made for his placement in
administrative detention. He was placed in the Busmantsi temporary detention centre for aliens
near Sofia. The Supreme Administrative Court ruled that the appeals lodged by the applicant against
these orders were inadmissible as being out of time.
In November 2013 M.M. was transferred to Sofia Airport and put on a flight bound for Lebanon. As
the Lebanese authorities refused him entry he was sent back to Bulgaria. On his arrival in Sofia he
was detained at the airport. On 4 December 2014 the Court, after receiving a request for interim
measures under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, decided to indicate to the Bulgarian Government that
they should not expel the applicant to Syria for the duration of the proceedings before it.
On 14 December 2013 the National Security Agency stayed execution of the expulsion measure and
ordered M.M.’s placement in administrative detention. M.M. applied to the Sofia Administrative
Court, arguing that his detention was no longer justified since execution of the expulsion measure
had been stayed. The Administrative Court upheld his detention, but that judgment was quashed by
the Supreme Administrative Court. The Administrative Court ordered M.M.’s release.
In parallel with these proceedings, the Sofia Administrative Court ordered the extension of the
applicant’s detention for a further six months. He was therefore released on 16 December 2014.
1
Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber
judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a
panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and
deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the
Convention, judgments delivered by a Committee are final.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution
2
Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.
