Residence permit for young Syrian woman wrongly refused
Published: Wednesday, Aug 28th 2024, 12:10
Volver a Live Feed
The Fribourg authorities must grant a residence permit to a Syrian girl who has been living in Switzerland for ten years. This was decided by the Federal Supreme Court with reference to the right to respect for private life and upheld the appeal of the 15-year-old.
The girl, who was born in 2009, came to Switzerland with her parents and siblings in 2014. The family's application for asylum was rejected, but they were granted temporary admission. In 2021, the Office for Population and Migration of the Canton of Fribourg rejected the student's application for a residence permit, which was confirmed by the cantonal administrative court.
The Federal Supreme Court upheld the girl's appeal in a ruling published on Wednesday. The cantonal authorities will have to grant her a residence permit. In her complaint, the schoolgirl invoked the right to respect for private life in accordance with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
In its decision, the highest Swiss court refers to its previous case law. There, it stated that the status of temporary admission can affect the right to respect for private life in certain situations.
In addition, according to the Foreign Nationals and Integration Act, applications for a residence permit from temporarily admitted persons who have been in Switzerland for more than five years must be examined in detail. Integration, family circumstances and the reasonableness of a return to the country of origin must be taken into account.
Concrete disadvantages to be expected
In this specific case, the Federal Supreme Court found that the status of temporary admission led to concrete disadvantages in view of the length of the student's stay in Switzerland and her age. Overall, there is an impairment of her private life within the meaning of Article 8 ECHR, which justifies the granting of a residence permit.
In view of her age, she is more affected than younger children by the disadvantages associated with provisional admission. As they approach the age of majority, 15-year-olds have a growing interest in confirming their right to be present in Switzerland.
The restriction on her international mobility should also be taken into account. The complainant had reached an age at which she might have to travel abroad for educational purposes or as part of school trips.
In particular, it should be noted that she is approaching the end of compulsory education and is already confronted with the question of her further education. In this respect, provisional admission could be an obstacle when looking for an apprenticeship.
The pupil had then done everything that could be expected of her for her integration. Given the circumstances, her knowledge of French and her academic performance were excellent. From the perspective of the public interest, according to the Federal Supreme Court, it should also be noted that she is not expected to be returned to Syria in the foreseeable future. (Judgment 2C_157/2023 of 23.7.2024)
©Keystone/SDA
Spanish 
English 
German 
French 
Arabic