| Applicant name | Goma |
| Applicant type | Natural person (immigrant) |
| Number of applicants | 1 |
| Country | Denmark |
| Application no. | 18646/22 |
| Date | 05/09/2023 |
| Judges | Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer, President, Faris Vehabović, Iulia Antoanella Motoc, Branko Lubarda, Anja Seibert-Fohr, Ana Maria Guerra Martins, Anne Louise Bormann |
| Institution | Court |
| Type | Judgment |
| Outcome Art. 8 | No violation |
| Reason | Necessary (prevention disorder and crime) |
| Type of privacy | Private life; relational privacy |
| Keywords | Expulsion; proportional |
| Facts of the case | The applicant was born in 1999 in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In 2003, he was granted a residence permit in Denmark as a quota refugee. He has a criminal record; in 2018, he was found guilty of rape, and sentenced to two years and six months’ imprisonment and issued with an expulsion order, suspended, with a probation period of two years and in 2020, he was fined for a violation of the Controlled Substances Act and later was convicted of robbery, for which he was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment. The applicant was also expelled with a lifelong ban on returning to Denmark. |
| Analysis | The Court quickly establishes that there has been an interference with applicant’s private life, that such was in accordance with the law and served the interest of preventing disorder and crime. Because the applicant lived in Denmark for almost his entire life, the Court finds that there most be very serious reasons to oust him. The ECtHR finds that the domestic courts not only gave particular weight to the seriousness of the crime committed and the sentence imposed and took into account the applicant’s criminal past, but also that the applicant had been in Denmark since he was three years old and attached weight to the social, cultural and relational ties he had in Denmark. Hence, there were very serious reasons for the expulsion of the person and the domestic courts took all relevant aspect of the case into account when making a judgement. |
| Other Article violation? | – |
| Damage awarded | – |
| Documents | Judgment |