The applicants alleged that the first applicant’s expulsion from Bulgaria amounted to unjustified interference with their right to respect for their family life, enshrined in Article 8 of the Convention.
‘The Court is naturally mindful of the fact that in the particular context of measures concerning national security, the requirement of foreseeability cannot be the same as in many other fields. In particular, the requirement of ‘foreseeability’ of the law does not go so far as to compel states to enact legal provisions listing in detail all conduct that may prompt a decision to expel an individual on national security grounds. By the nature of things, threats to national security may vary in character and may be unanticipated or difficult to define in advance. However, even where national security is at stake, the concepts of lawfulness and the rule of law in a democratic society require that deportation measures affecting fundamental human rights be subject to some form of adversarial proceedings before an independent authority or a court competent to effectively scrutinise the reasons for them and review the relevant evidence, if need be with appropriate procedural litigation on the use of classified information.’
Judges:
Peer Lorenzen, P
Citations:
1365/07, [2008] ECHR 349, (2008) 47 EHRR 51
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 8
Cited by:
Cited – X and Another v Z (Children) and Another CA 5-Feb-2015
The Court was asked as to the circumstances in which DNA profiles obtained by the police in exercise of their criminal law enforcement functions can, without the consent of the data subject, be put to uses which are remote from the field of criminal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights
Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.267291
