# C_2014009EN.01002002.xml

| 11.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 9/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 9/20

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 28 October 2013 — Z. Zh.; other party: Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie and Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie; other party: I.O.

(Case C-554/13)

2014/C 9/31

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Z. Zh.

Appellant:

Other party: Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

Other party:

and

Appellant: Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

Appellant:

Other party: I.O.

Other party:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Does a third-country national who is staying illegally within the territory of a Member State pose a risk to public policy, within the meaning of Article 7(4) of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals (OJ 2008 L 348; ‘the Return Directive’), merely because he is suspected of having committed a criminal offence under national law, or is it necessary that he should have been convicted in a criminal court for the commission of that offence and, in the latter case, must that conviction have become final and absolute? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does a third-country national who is staying illegally within the territory of a Member State pose a risk to public policy, within the meaning of Article 7(4) of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals (OJ 2008 L 348; ‘the Return Directive’), merely because he is suspected of having committed a criminal offence under national law, or is it necessary that he should have been convicted in a criminal court for the commission of that offence and, in the latter case, must that conviction have become final and absolute?

| 2. | In the assessment as to whether a third-country national who is staying illegally within the territory of a Member State poses a risk to public policy within the meaning of Article 7(4) of the Return Directive, do other facts and circumstances of the case, in addition to a suspicion or a conviction, also play a role, such as the severity or type of criminal offence under national law, the time that has elapsed and the intention of the person concerned? |
| --- | --- |

2.

In the assessment as to whether a third-country national who is staying illegally within the territory of a Member State poses a risk to public policy within the meaning of Article 7(4) of the Return Directive, do other facts and circumstances of the case, in addition to a suspicion or a conviction, also play a role, such as the severity or type of criminal offence under national law, the time that has elapsed and the intention of the person concerned?

| 3. | Do the facts and circumstances of the case which are relevant to the assessment referred to in Question 2 also have a role to play in the option provided for in Article 7(4) of the Return Directive, in a case where the person concerned poses a risk to public policy within the meaning of that provision, of being able to choose between, on the one hand, refraining from granting a period for voluntary departure and, on the other hand, granting a period for voluntary departure which is shorter than seven days? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Do the facts and circumstances of the case which are relevant to the assessment referred to in Question 2 also have a role to play in the option provided for in Article 7(4) of the Return Directive, in a case where the person concerned poses a risk to public policy within the meaning of that provision, of being able to choose between, on the one hand, refraining from granting a period for voluntary departure and, on the other hand, granting a period for voluntary departure which is shorter than seven days?

---