H.A. AND M.A. v. SWITZERLAND

THE FACTS

The applicants are Lebanese nationals born in 1972 and 1973,

respectively. Before the Commission they are represented by

Mr. T. Tschudi, a lawyer practising in Bern.

In 1990 the applicants travelled from Lebanon over Italy to

Switzerland where on 16 July 1990 they applied for asylum. In a

decision of 20 July 1990 the Delegate for Refugees ordered the first

applicant to reside at Interlaken in the Canton of Bern and the

second applicant at Veltheim in the Canton of Aargau. The decision

stated that there were no interests worthy of protection in

determining the applicants' residence in a particular canton. A

third brother who has also applied for asylum in Switzerland has

been requested to reside in the Canton of Geneva.

On 26 March 1991 the Federal Court (Bundesgericht) declared

inadmissible the applicants' administrative law appeal

(Verwaltungsgerichtsbeschwerde) since the decision of the Delegate

for Refugees was not subject to appeal.

COMPLAINTS

The applicants complained that the decision of the Federal

Delegate for Refugees to allocate them to different cantons violated

their right to respect for family life within the meaning of

Article 8 of the Convention. They submitted that in view of their

young age and their common background they should be enabled to

reside together, and that their financial means only allowed them to

visit each other every eight days. Under Article 13 of the

Convention the applicants complained that they had no effective

remedy to contest the Delegate's decisions.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 17 January 1991 and

registered on 25 February 1991.

On 2 September 1991 the Commission decided to communicate the

application to the respondent Government and invite them to submit

written observations on the admissibility and merits of the

application.

On 6 November 1991 the Government informed the Commission of

an agreement reached between the applicants and the Government. The

agreement provides, inter alia, that henceforth both applicants

shall be able to reside at Veltheim in the Canton of Aargau, that

they will receive compensation from the Government for costs and

expenses and as just satisfaction, and that they withdraw their

application to the Commission.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The Commission observes that the applicants are now permitted

to reside together, that they have obtained compensation for costs

and expenses and as just satisfaction, and that they wish to

withdraw their application.

The Commission considers that the factual basis of the

applicants' petition has now been resolved, within the meaning of

Article 30 para. 1 (a) and (b) of the Convention. Moreover, the

Commission finds no reasons of a general character affecting respect

for Human Rights, as defined in the Convention, which require the

further examination of the case by virtue of Article 30 para. 1 in

fine of the Convention.