Y.E. v. SWITZERLAND

THE FACTS

The applicant, a Sudanese citizen born in 1959, is a software

computer engineer residing in Zürich.

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be

summarised as follows.

The applicant, who grew up in Egypt, entered Switzerland in 1983.

In 1984 he commenced his studies at the University of Zürich in

economic computer sciences (Wirtschaftsinformatik). He also undertook

studies at the Rapperswil Intercantonal Technical High School where he

obtained a degree in software engineering in 1992.

In 1991 the applicant informed the Swiss Aliens' Police

(Fremdenpolizei) that he would terminate his university studies within

a year, whereupon his residence permit (Aufenthaltsbewilligung) was

prolonged until 1992.

On 25 November 1992 the applicant filed a request for a

prolongation of the residence permit for a further year. This was

refused by the Police Department (Polizeidirektion) of the Government

(Regierungsrat) of the Canton of Zürich on the ground that he had had

sufficient time to complete his studies.

The applicant's appeal was dismissed by the Government of Zürich

on 11 August 1993. In its decision the Government noted that the

applicant had come to Switzerland to study. He was now in his 16th

semester and could be expected to have terminated his studies within

this period of time.

On 1 September 1993 the Federal Office for Foreigners (Bundesamt

für Ausländerfragen) ordered the applicant to leave Switzerland.

Meanwhile, the applicant worked in 1992 during the university

holidays for three weeks in the printing offices of a newspaper. As

a result, he suffers from respiratory problems, in particular bronchial

asthma. He requested social security benefits as the illness had

occurred during work, but his request was dismissed, upon appeal, by

the Swiss Accident Insurance Foundation (Schweizerische

Unfallversicherungsanstalt) on 14 April 1994.

The applicant filed an appeal against the decision of 1 September

1993 in which he referred in particular to his respiratory problems.

The appeal was dismissed by the Federal Department of Justice and

Police (Eidgenössisches Justiz- und Polizeidepartement) on 21 November

1997. In its decision the Department noted in particular that the

applicant suffered from bronchial asthma, particularly in the evenings

when going to bed; when it was cold; and when he walked quickly.

However, according to a medical report the applicant's condition was

stable, though the applicant could only be expected to return to his

home country if he received a particular medication. In this respect,

the decision noted that the company producing the medicaments was

willing to ensure that the applicant would receive the required

supplies in Sudan. The decision also noted that the applicant would

be privileged in his home country in view of his education and his

personal and economic circumstances, and that he was envisaging

founding a computer firm in respect of which he had the necessary

knowledge. The decision finally referred to the applicant's Sudanese

and Egyptian dual nationality which would permit him also to reside in

Egypt where he had previously lived.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains, without reference to any particular

Convention provision, of his return to Sudan, stating that he suffers

from bronchial asthma requiring a particular medication. He submits

five medical statements confirming this situation. These statements

consider that the applicant may be treated as an outpatient, though he

can only be expected to return to his home country if appropriate

medication is assured. The applicant submits that he cannot obtain,

or afford to buy, these expensive medicaments in Sudan, and that the

tensions between Sudan and Egypt imply that he would not obtain a

residence permit in Egypt.