A A A

People’s Advocate, Mihail Cotorobai is dismayed by the decision of the Moldovan authorities on expulsion of a group of Turkish persons from the administration of Moldovan-Turkish Theoretical Lyceum „Orizont”

People’s Advocate, Mihail Cotorobai is dismayed by the decision of the Moldovan authorities on expulsion of a group of Turkish persons from the administration of Moldovan-Turkish Theoretical Lyceum „Orizont” under the pretext on existence of threats to the address of the national security. 

This is because by the mentioned above action, in the opinion of Ombudsman created from the information appeared in mass-media the international engagements on human rights which were assumed by the Republic of Moldova, particularly by adhering to the Convention on protection human rights and fundamental freedoms; UN Convention against torture and other treatments; Convention on status of refugees signed on July 28, 1951 at Geneva were defied in a flagrant manner.

Information appeared in the public space offers grounds to suppose that even the legal provisions provided by the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova (article 19), Law no. 270 of 18.12.2008 on asylum in the Republic of Moldova; Law no. 200 of 16.07.2010 on regime of foreigners in the Republic of Moldova were not respected.

Art. 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights obliges the states to guarantee the rights provided by it „to any person being under their jurisdiction”.  These persons also include the foreigners. A signatory state of the Convention is responsible under the article 1 for all the actions and omissions of its bodies, no matter if the action or omission were the consequence of a national law or the need to respect the international legal obligations. Although the Convention does not guarantee the right to get the asylum, the state which makes the expulsion is obliged to abstain of removal of a person who is exposed to risk of death or maltreatment in the destination state.  

In the case Soering vs United Kingdom, (July 7, 1989), the European Court for Human Rights has decided for the first time that the liability of a state can be engaged if it decides to expulse a person who can suffer bad treatments in the destination state.

The persons recently expulsed from the country are protected by the international and national norms on refugees because according to the information made public, they have submitted requests on asylum to the Bureau of Migration and Asylum of the Republic of Moldova. 

In this case, the legal and international provisions were obviously violated. The principle of non-return constitutes the key-element of refugees ‘protection which is provided in the Convention on the status of refugees, signed on July 28, 1951. This means that the refugees should not be returned back in a country where they have a reason to be afraid of persecution.

Art.11 of Law on asylum in the Republic of Moldova no. 270 of 18.12.2008 specifies that No asylum-seeker shall be expelled or returned from the border or from the territory of the Republic of Moldova”.

On the other hand, according to the art. 33 of the mentioned above Convention” No contracting state will expulse or return in no way a refugee abroad the territories where the his/her life or freedom would be threatened based on religion, race, nationality, membership to a social group or politic opinions”.

Convention for protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms prohibits in an absolute manner any form of return of a person who can be exposed to real risk of contrary treatment art. 2 and 3 of ECHR.

The European Court for Human Rights has exposed in cases on existence of a real risk that a suspected or convicted person for terrorism to be exposed to bad treatments in other state, stating that the interdiction of return in that country is absolute, no matter what the previously committed offenses or his/her behavior   (Case Saadi vs Italy , CEDO 2008).

According to Law on the regime of foreigners in the Republic of Moldova no. 200 of  16.07.2010, the decision on declaring a foreigner as an undesirable person is notified about it by the competent authority for foreigners, so she/he being able to file an appeal against it in the court  „within 5 business days of the date he/she was notified”. 

For clarifying details on this procedure Mihail Cotorobai has required relevant information from the Bureau of Migration and Asylum, the competent authority for foreigners.

People’s Advocate contests the fact that the state under the ground of an international public law principle  well established and without prejudicing of engagements assumed by the international treaties has the rights to control the entry, staying and removal of foreigners from their territories. But this does not mean that the foreigners who are legally or even illegally on the territory of a state cannot invoke at least some of the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention and/or its additional protocols.

In this context, the state authorities are obliged before making an expulsion decision to analyze deeply the risks to which the person can be exposed to and the consequences of his/her expulsion.   

Or, in Turkey for the expulsed persons the risk to be exposed to torture, inhuman and degrading treatments is an eminent one, according to several international reports[1].    

The People’s Advocate subscribes to the initiative of the president of the Parliament to organize parliamentary hearings in this case, planning to present in an operative manner in the Legislative Body the its conclusions on international norms and standards which are applied in similar situations.

In the case when the group of persons from the Moldovan-Turkish Theoretical Lyceum was not yet expulsed from the country, the Ombudsman makes appeal to the authorities to renounce to this intention. The People’s Advocate makes appeal to the competent authorities to abstain of other decisions of this kind concerning the persons of Turkish origin in relation of which the extradition is planned upon the request of the Turkish authorities. 

 

Department on promotion of human rights and communication

Tel.: 060002656