opencaselaw.ch

CRC/C/100/D/159/2021

N.A.H and A.A.H. v. Finland

UNO-Kinderrechtsausschuss (CRC) · 2026-01-30 · en UN

Discontinuance decision; Subjects: RIGHTS OF THE CHILD, FINLAND; [CRC: Kinderrechtskonvention, Übereinkommen über die Rechte des Kindes; Convention relative aux droits de l'enfant; Convenzione sui diritti del fanciullo]

Erwägungen (8 Absätze)

E. 1 The authors of the communications are N.A.H. and A.A.H., nationals of Iraq, born in 1970 and 2003 respectively. They are the mother and older brother of S.A.H. and I.A.H., nationals of Iraq born in 2008 and 2005 respectively, on whose behalf the communication is submitted. The authors claim that S.A.H. and I.A.H., if returned to Greece, would be victims of a violation by the State Party of their rights under articles 3, 4, 20, 22, 24, 26, 27 and 37 of the Convention. The authors are represented by counsel. The Optional Protocol entered into force for the State Party on 12 February 2016.

E. 2 In 2019, the authors were granted international protection in Greece. On 13 April 2021, the authors arrived in Finland and applied for international protection. On 30 July 2021, the Finnish Immigration Service denied them residence permits and declared their application inadmissible. The authors were ordered to return to Greece. On 18 August 2021, the authors appealed against the decision of the Finnish Immigration Service to Helsinki Administrative Court and petitioned the Court to prohibit the enforcement of the decision. On 19 August 2021, the Court rejected the petition for prohibition of enforcement in an interlocutory decision.

* Adopted by the Committee at its 100th session (12–30 January 2026). ** The following members of the Committee participated in the examination of the communication: Suzanne Aho, Thuwayba Al Barwani, Hynd Ayoubi Idrissi, Mary Beloff, Rosaria Correa, Timothy Ekesa, Bragi Gudbrandsson, Mariana Ianachevici, Philip Jaffé, Sophie Kiladze, Cephas Lumina, Benyam Dawit Mezmur, Juliana Scerri Ferrante, Aïssatou Alassane Sidikou, Zeinebou Taleb Moussa and Benoit Van Keirsbilck. United Nations CRC/C/100/D/159/2021 Convention on the Rights of the Child Distr.: General 13 February 2026 Original: English CRC/C/100/D/159/2021 2 GE.26-01420

E. 3 On 21 September 2021, pursuant to article 6 of the Optional Protocol, the working group on communications, acting on behalf of the Committee, requested the State Party to refrain from returning the authors to Greece while their case was under consideration by the Committee.

E. 4 On 21 January 2022, the State Party submitted its observations on the admissibility of the communication and requested that the admissibility be examined separately from the merits. On 20 May 2022, the State Party submitted its observations on the admissibility and merits of the communication. The State Party noted that the Supreme Administrative Court had not yet rendered its decision, and that the matter was still pending before the Court.

E. 5 On 25 January 2023, the authors provided their comments on the State Party’s observations. On 28 March 2024, the authors provided additional submissions on the communication.

E. 6 On 4 June 2024, the State Party informed the Committee that, on 30 October 2023, the Supreme Administrative Court had overturned the decisions of Helsinki Administrative Court and the Finnish Immigration Service to deny the authors residence permits, order their return and ban them from re-entering Finland, and had returned the case to the Finnish Immigration Service to be re-examined. On 5 June 2024, the Committee, acting through its working group on communications, decided to suspend the consideration of the communication.

E. 7 On 11 November 2024, the Finnish Immigration Service granted the authors continuous residence permits on a discretionary basis on humanitarian grounds, in accordance with section 52 of the Aliens Act, valid for one year from the date of the decision. The State Party therefore requested the Committee to discontinue its consideration of the communication and to withdraw its request for interim measures. On 21 March 2025, the authors informed the Committee that they partially agreed with the State Party’s request, but that there were uncertainties surrounding the residence permits, particularly concerning children who had reached or were approaching the age of 18. The authors requested that the Committee maintain its request for interim measures to ensure that they could fully recover from their traumatic experiences and continue to live in the safety that they had found in Finland.

E. 8 At a meeting on 30 January 2026, the Committee, taking into account that the authors had been granted residence permits and were therefore no longer at risk of being returned to Greece, considered that the case had become moot and decided to discontinue the consideration of communication No. 159/2021 in accordance with rule 26 of its rules of procedure under the Optional Protocol.

Volltext (verifizierbarer Originaltext)

GE.26-01420 (E) 120226 120226 Committee on the Rights of the Child Decision adopted by the Committee under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure, concerning communication No. 159/2021*, ** Communication submitted by: N.A.H and A.A.H. (represented by counsel, Atlas Saarikoski) Alleged victims: S.A.H and I.A.H. State Party: Finland Date of communication: 20 September 2021 (initial submission) Subject matter: Return to Greece under Regulation (EU) No. 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 (the Dublin III Regulation) Substantive issues: Non-refoulement; best interests of the child; refugee status Articles of the Convention: 3, 4, 20, 22, 24, 26, 27 and 37 1. The authors of the communications are N.A.H. and A.A.H., nationals of Iraq, born in 1970 and 2003 respectively. They are the mother and older brother of S.A.H. and I.A.H., nationals of Iraq born in 2008 and 2005 respectively, on whose behalf the communication is submitted. The authors claim that S.A.H. and I.A.H., if returned to Greece, would be victims of a violation by the State Party of their rights under articles 3, 4, 20, 22, 24, 26, 27 and 37 of the Convention. The authors are represented by counsel. The Optional Protocol entered into force for the State Party on 12 February 2016. 2. In 2019, the authors were granted international protection in Greece. On 13 April 2021, the authors arrived in Finland and applied for international protection. On 30 July 2021, the Finnish Immigration Service denied them residence permits and declared their application inadmissible. The authors were ordered to return to Greece. On 18 August 2021, the authors appealed against the decision of the Finnish Immigration Service to Helsinki Administrative Court and petitioned the Court to prohibit the enforcement of the decision. On 19 August 2021, the Court rejected the petition for prohibition of enforcement in an interlocutory decision.

* Adopted by the Committee at its 100th session (12–30 January 2026). ** The following members of the Committee participated in the examination of the communication: Suzanne Aho, Thuwayba Al Barwani, Hynd Ayoubi Idrissi, Mary Beloff, Rosaria Correa, Timothy Ekesa, Bragi Gudbrandsson, Mariana Ianachevici, Philip Jaffé, Sophie Kiladze, Cephas Lumina, Benyam Dawit Mezmur, Juliana Scerri Ferrante, Aïssatou Alassane Sidikou, Zeinebou Taleb Moussa and Benoit Van Keirsbilck. United Nations CRC/C/100/D/159/2021 Convention on the Rights of the Child Distr.: General 13 February 2026 Original: English CRC/C/100/D/159/2021 2 GE.26-01420 3. On 21 September 2021, pursuant to article 6 of the Optional Protocol, the working group on communications, acting on behalf of the Committee, requested the State Party to refrain from returning the authors to Greece while their case was under consideration by the Committee. 4. On 21 January 2022, the State Party submitted its observations on the admissibility of the communication and requested that the admissibility be examined separately from the merits. On 20 May 2022, the State Party submitted its observations on the admissibility and merits of the communication. The State Party noted that the Supreme Administrative Court had not yet rendered its decision, and that the matter was still pending before the Court. 5. On 25 January 2023, the authors provided their comments on the State Party’s observations. On 28 March 2024, the authors provided additional submissions on the communication. 6. On 4 June 2024, the State Party informed the Committee that, on 30 October 2023, the Supreme Administrative Court had overturned the decisions of Helsinki Administrative Court and the Finnish Immigration Service to deny the authors residence permits, order their return and ban them from re-entering Finland, and had returned the case to the Finnish Immigration Service to be re-examined. On 5 June 2024, the Committee, acting through its working group on communications, decided to suspend the consideration of the communication. 7. On 11 November 2024, the Finnish Immigration Service granted the authors continuous residence permits on a discretionary basis on humanitarian grounds, in accordance with section 52 of the Aliens Act, valid for one year from the date of the decision. The State Party therefore requested the Committee to discontinue its consideration of the communication and to withdraw its request for interim measures. On 21 March 2025, the authors informed the Committee that they partially agreed with the State Party’s request, but that there were uncertainties surrounding the residence permits, particularly concerning children who had reached or were approaching the age of 18. The authors requested that the Committee maintain its request for interim measures to ensure that they could fully recover from their traumatic experiences and continue to live in the safety that they had found in Finland. 8. At a meeting on 30 January 2026, the Committee, taking into account that the authors had been granted residence permits and were therefore no longer at risk of being returned to Greece, considered that the case had become moot and decided to discontinue the consideration of communication No. 159/2021 in accordance with rule 26 of its rules of procedure under the Optional Protocol.