Discontinuance decision; Subjects: RIGHTS OF THE CHILD, ARGENTINA; [CRC: Kinderrechtskonvention, Übereinkommen über die Rechte des Kindes; Convention relative aux droits de l'enfant; Convenzione sui diritti del fanciullo]
Erwägungen (7 Absätze)
E. 1 The author of the communication is C.E.B.F., a national of Uruguay born on 12 February 1988. He submits the communication on behalf of his two daughters, C.Z.T., born on 3 March 2001, and F.L.T., born on 2 November 2004, both of Argentine nationality. Since he was 5 years old, C.E.B.F. has lived in Argentina, where he has studied, worked and raised his family. He claims that the State party has violated his daughters’ rights under articles 3 (1); 6 (2); 9 (1) and (2); 12 (1) and (2); 16; 18 (2); 24 (1) and 27 (1) and (3) of the Convention. The author is represented by counsel. The Optional Protocol entered into force for the State party on 14 July 2015.
E. 2 In 2015, the National Migration Directorate of Argentina ordered the author’s expulsion to Uruguay because he had been sentenced to 3 years and 8 months’ imprisonment
* Reissued for technical reasons on 25 November 2024. ** Adopted by the Committee at its ninety-seventh session (August 26–13 September 2024). *** The following members of the Committee participated in the examination of the communication: Suzanne Aho, Aïssatou Alassane Moulaye, Thuwayba Al Barwani, Hynd Ayoubi Idrissi, Rinchen Chophel, Rosaria Correa, Bragi Gudbrandsson, Sopio Kiladze, Benyam Dawit Mezmur, Otani Mikiko, Luis Ernesto Pedernera Reyna, Ann Skelton, Velina Todorova, Benoit Van Keirsbilck and Ratou Zara. **** Pursuant to rule 8, paragraph 1 (a) of the Committee’s Rules of Procedure under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child relating to a communications procedure, Mary Beloff did not participate in the consideration of the communication. United Nations CRC/C/97/D/208/2022* Convention on the Rights of the Child Distr.: General 9 October 2024 English Original: Spanish CRC/C/97/D/208/2022 2 GE.24-17880 and banned his returning to Argentina for eight years as he had committed a criminal offence.1 C.E.B.F. challenged this decision on the grounds that his expulsion and the ban on his return to Argentina for a period of eight years could have irreparable consequences in the lives of his daughters, who had been born and educated in Argentina, such as a risk to their development and material well-being.
E. 3 In 2018, the Ministry of the Interior rejected the appeal of C.E.B.F. That same year, after exhausting administrative channels, he challenged the expulsion decision before the Argentine courts under article 84 of the National Migration Act on family reunification. National Court of First Instance in Federal Administrative Matters No. 6 dismissed this appeal and upheld the decision of the administrative body. The author appealed this decision on the grounds that the judgement had not taken due account of his minor daughters’ family ties and rights at the time of the administrative and judicial proceedings.
E. 4 In 2019, the Federal Administrative Appeal Court rejected the appeal of C.E.B.F. and in 2022 the Supreme Court declared his appeal inadmissible. The author therefore considers that he has exhausted domestic administrative and judicial remedies and that the expulsion order has become final.
E. 5 On 30 December 2022, pursuant to article 6 of the Optional Protocol and rule 7 of its rules of procedure under the Optional Protocol to the Convention, the Committee, acting through its Working Group on Communications, decided to register the communication, but not to request interim measures on the grounds that C.Z.T. and F.L.T. were adults when the complaint was submitted to the Committee.
E. 6 On 27 June 2023, the State party submitted its observations to the Committee, informing it that on 28 April 2023, the National Migration Directorate had decided to grant permanent residence to the author on the basis of the principle of family unity and support and the right to family reunification. The State party therefore asked the Committee to suspend its consideration of the communication which had become moot.
E. 7 At its meeting on 2 September 2024, the Committee, having considered the State party’s request to discontinue consideration of communication No. 208/2022, noted that a decision had been taken in favour of the author and that he could no longer be deported to Uruguay. The Committee considered that the granting of a residence permit rendered the communication moot and therefore decided to discontinue its consideration thereof, in accordance with rule 26 of its rules of procedure under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure. 1 Article 29 (c) of National Migration Act No. 25.871 provides that conviction of or serving a sentence for a crime carrying a prison sentence of 3 years or more under Argentine law is grounds for prohibiting that person’s return to the county
Volltext (verifizierbarer Originaltext)
GE.24-17880 (E) 251124 261124 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, in respect of communication No. 208/2022**, ***, **** Communication submitted by: C.E.B.F. (represented by counsel, Pablo José Asa and Lucía Verónica Galoppo) Alleged victims: C.Z.T. and F.L.T. State party: Argentina Date of communication: 1 November 2022 (initial submission) Date of adoption of decision: 2 September 2024 Subject matter: Deportation of the father of two Argentine girls to Uruguay Substantive issues: Best interests of the child; right to freedom of expression; right to development; right not to be separated from parents; right to be heard; right to health Articles of the Convention: 3 (1); 6 (2); 9 (1) and (2); 12 (1) and (2); 16; 18 (2); 24 (1) and 27(1) and (3) 1. The author of the communication is C.E.B.F., a national of Uruguay born on 12 February 1988. He submits the communication on behalf of his two daughters, C.Z.T., born on 3 March 2001, and F.L.T., born on 2 November 2004, both of Argentine nationality. Since he was 5 years old, C.E.B.F. has lived in Argentina, where he has studied, worked and raised his family. He claims that the State party has violated his daughters’ rights under articles 3 (1); 6 (2); 9 (1) and (2); 12 (1) and (2); 16; 18 (2); 24 (1) and 27 (1) and (3) of the Convention. The author is represented by counsel. The Optional Protocol entered into force for the State party on 14 July 2015. 2. In 2015, the National Migration Directorate of Argentina ordered the author’s expulsion to Uruguay because he had been sentenced to 3 years and 8 months’ imprisonment
* Reissued for technical reasons on 25 November 2024. ** Adopted by the Committee at its ninety-seventh session (August 26–13 September 2024). *** The following members of the Committee participated in the examination of the communication: Suzanne Aho, Aïssatou Alassane Moulaye, Thuwayba Al Barwani, Hynd Ayoubi Idrissi, Rinchen Chophel, Rosaria Correa, Bragi Gudbrandsson, Sopio Kiladze, Benyam Dawit Mezmur, Otani Mikiko, Luis Ernesto Pedernera Reyna, Ann Skelton, Velina Todorova, Benoit Van Keirsbilck and Ratou Zara. **** Pursuant to rule 8, paragraph 1 (a) of the Committee’s Rules of Procedure under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child relating to a communications procedure, Mary Beloff did not participate in the consideration of the communication. United Nations CRC/C/97/D/208/2022* Convention on the Rights of the Child Distr.: General 9 October 2024 English Original: Spanish CRC/C/97/D/208/2022 2 GE.24-17880 and banned his returning to Argentina for eight years as he had committed a criminal offence.1 C.E.B.F. challenged this decision on the grounds that his expulsion and the ban on his return to Argentina for a period of eight years could have irreparable consequences in the lives of his daughters, who had been born and educated in Argentina, such as a risk to their development and material well-being. 3. In 2018, the Ministry of the Interior rejected the appeal of C.E.B.F. That same year, after exhausting administrative channels, he challenged the expulsion decision before the Argentine courts under article 84 of the National Migration Act on family reunification. National Court of First Instance in Federal Administrative Matters No. 6 dismissed this appeal and upheld the decision of the administrative body. The author appealed this decision on the grounds that the judgement had not taken due account of his minor daughters’ family ties and rights at the time of the administrative and judicial proceedings. 4. In 2019, the Federal Administrative Appeal Court rejected the appeal of C.E.B.F. and in 2022 the Supreme Court declared his appeal inadmissible. The author therefore considers that he has exhausted domestic administrative and judicial remedies and that the expulsion order has become final. 5. On 30 December 2022, pursuant to article 6 of the Optional Protocol and rule 7 of its rules of procedure under the Optional Protocol to the Convention, the Committee, acting through its Working Group on Communications, decided to register the communication, but not to request interim measures on the grounds that C.Z.T. and F.L.T. were adults when the complaint was submitted to the Committee. 6. On 27 June 2023, the State party submitted its observations to the Committee, informing it that on 28 April 2023, the National Migration Directorate had decided to grant permanent residence to the author on the basis of the principle of family unity and support and the right to family reunification. The State party therefore asked the Committee to suspend its consideration of the communication which had become moot. 7. At its meeting on 2 September 2024, the Committee, having considered the State party’s request to discontinue consideration of communication No. 208/2022, noted that a decision had been taken in favour of the author and that he could no longer be deported to Uruguay. The Committee considered that the granting of a residence permit rendered the communication moot and therefore decided to discontinue its consideration thereof, in accordance with rule 26 of its rules of procedure under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on a communications procedure. 1 Article 29 (c) of National Migration Act No. 25.871 provides that conviction of or serving a sentence for a crime carrying a prison sentence of 3 years or more under Argentine law is grounds for prohibiting that person’s return to the county