[ad_1]
An Iraqi convicted in March 2016 of supporting a criminal organization must be provisionally admitted at the request of the. The Secretary of State for Migration (SEM) denied entry, against which the interested party filed a complaint.
The Iraqi appeared in federal criminal court in 2016 with three other compatriots. He and two other defendants were sentenced to several years in prison. The main defendant in that trial is disabled due to injury and is therefore dependent on a wheelchair.
Voluntarily to Turkey, but entry was denied.
The Federal Police Office (Fedpol) ordered the applicant’s expulsion after sentencing. The SEM revoked the man’s refugee status in November 2016 and revoked his asylum. Finally, in late June 2017, the man voluntarily traveled to Turkey with his wife and two children, according to a ruling by the Federal Administrative Court published on Tuesday.
However, the Turkish authorities refused the family’s entry, so they returned to Switzerland. The Iraqi requested a second asylum. The SEM concluded that he fulfilled refugee status, but rejected his application as unworthy of asylum. He noted that there was a final expulsion decision against the man.
No referral was issued
In October 2018, Fedpol finally asked the SEM to examine a provisional admission for the man. The Secretary of State decided that it would not grant temporary admission despite the inadmissible execution of the existing deportation.
He justified this decision with the article of the Federal Constitution that was adopted as part of the deportation initiative. Consequently, all foreigners who endanger the security of Switzerland must be expelled.
Sem argued that the Aliens and Integration Law only absolutely excludes temporary admission in those cases where the expulsion of someone from the country has been ordered under criminal law. The complainant was not forwarded because the relevant law was not yet in force at that time.
The interpretation is inadmissible for the Federal Administrative Court
Therefore, the Sem interpreted article 68 of the Aliens and Integration Law, according to which foreigners can be expelled if the security of Switzerland is in danger, in the same way. It cannot be that people who endanger high-quality legal interests, such as the security and continued existence of Switzerland, are better off than criminals under common law.
According to the Federal Administrative Court, this interpretation is not allowed. You violate non-retroactivity. In addition, the deportation initiative committee had emphasized that the initiative was directed at people who would commit “serious crimes.” There is no mention of people who, despite this, would endanger Switzerland.
According to the Federal Administrative Court, it is also irrelevant that an amendment to the law that would prohibit the temporary admission of Iraqis is underway. Future law cannot be applied. (cat / SDA)
Correction: An earlier version of the article stated that the complainant was “wheelchair attacker Osama M.” acts. The editors made a mistake. The editors apologize for this error.
