CASE OF MUHAMMAD AND MUHAMMAD v. ROMANIA
Hearing: Muhammad and Muhammad v. Romania (no. 80982/12) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2019-09-25 00:00:00)
Application no.: 80982/12
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2020-10-15 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2020:1015JUD008098212
Respondent state: ROU
Articles of the Convention: 41;P7-1;P7-1-1;P7-1-2
Judges: Angelika Nußberger;Carlo Ranzoni;Eva Brems;Françoise Tulkens;Ganna Yudkivska;Georgios A. Serghides;Iulia Motoc;Jon Fridrik Kjølbro;Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos;Marko Bošnjak;Paul Lemmens;Pauliine Koskelo;Paulo Pinto De Albuquerque;Pieter Van Dijk;Robert Spano;Ksenija Turković;María Elósegui
Represented by: CRÂNGARIU E. ; DUMITRU F.
Issue: Article 85 §§ 1-5 of Emergency Ordinance (ordonanţei de urgenţă a Guvernului – “OUG”) no. 194/2002 on the status of aliens in Romania (“OUG no. 194/2002”) ; Law no. 182/2002 on the protection of secret information ; Section 3 of Law no. 51/1991 on national security

Strasbourg case-law cited: A. and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 3455/05, § 126, ECHR 2009;A. v. the Netherlands, no. 4900/06, § 143, 20 July 2010;Abou Amer v. Romania, no. 14521/03, § 58, 24 May 2011;Ahmed v. Romania, no. 34621/03, § 53, 13 July 2010;Al-Nashif v. Bulgaria, no. 50963/99, § 137, 20 June 2002;Amann v. Switzerland [GC], no. 27798/95, § 56, ECHR 2000 II;Artico v. Italy, 13 May 1980, § 33, Series A no. 37;Baltaji v. Bulgaria, no. 12919/04, 12 July 2011;Beuze v. Belgium [GC], no. 71409/10, § 150, 9 November 2018;C.G. and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 1365/07, §§ 70-74, 24 April 2008;De Souza Ribeiro v. France [GC], no. 22689/07, § 77, ECHR 2012;Fayed v. the United Kingdom, 21 September 1994, § 54, Series A no. 294 B;Fitt v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 29777/96, ECHR 2000-II;Fox, Campbell and Hartley v. the United Kingdom, 30 August 1990, § 41, Series A no. 182, Kerr v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 40451/98, 7 December 1999;Geleri v. Romania, no. 33118/05, §§ 46 and 48, 15 February 2011;Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no. 13255/07, § 228, ECHR 2014;Iatridis v. Greece (just satisfaction) [GC], no. 31107/96, § 54, ECHR 2000 XI;Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 50541/08 and 3 others, §§ 252 and 274, 13 September 2016;Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary [GC], no. 47287/15, § 125, 21 November 2019;Jasper v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 27052/95, § 52, 16 February 2000;Kaushal and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 1537/08, 2 September 2010;Klass and Others v. Germany, 6 September 1978, §§ 55-56, Series A no. 28;Ljatifi v. “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”, no. 19017/16, § 32, 17 May 2018;Lupsa v. Romania, no. 10337/04, § 55, ECHR 2006 VII;Maaouia v. France [GC], no. 39652/98, § 38, ECHR 2000 X;Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary [GC], no. 18030/11, § 121, 8 November 2016;Micallef v. Malta [GC], no. 17056/06, § 93, ECHR 2009;N.C. v. Italy [GC], no. 24952/94, § 56, ECHR 2002 X;Öcalan v. Turkey [GC], no. 46221/99, § 179, ECHR 2005 IV;Omar v. France, 29 July 1998, § 34, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 V;Radomilja and Others v. Croatia [GC], nos. 37685/10 and 22768/12, §§ 113-115 and § 126, 20 March 2018;Raza v. Bulgaria, no. 31465/08, § 54, 11 February 2010;Regner v. the Czech Republic [GC], no. 35289/11, 19 September 2017;Roman Zakharov v. Russia [GC], no. 47143/06, § 233, ECHR 2015;S.C. v. Romania, no. 9356/11, § 73, 10 February 2015;Schatschaschwili v. Germany [GC], no. 9154/10, §§ 107 and 119, ECHR 2015;Sejdovic and Sulejmanovic v. Italy (dec.), no. 57575/00, 14 March 2002;Sher and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 5201/11, § 149, ECHR 2015 (extracts);Soering v. the United Kingdom, 7 July 1989, § 87, Series A no. 161;Takush v. Greece, no. 2853/09, §§ 60-63, 17 January 2012
Conclusion: Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 7 - Procedural safeguards relating to expulsion of aliens (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 7 - Expulsion of an alien);Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed (Article 41 - Pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: TRUE