CAT/C/32/D/229/2003
Page 3
rules of procedure, not to return the complainant to Iran while his complaint was
under consideration by the Committee. The State party acceded to this request.
The facts as submitted:

2.1

The complainant was a high-ranking officer in the army of the former Shah of

Persia. After the Iranian revolution in 1979, he fled to Turkey and subsequently lived
in Bulgaria. Between 1993 and 1996, following the arrival of his wife and daughter in
Sweden, he unsuccessfully submitted several applications for a residence permit to the
Swedish authorities, before he was granted a temporary residence and work permit on
4 February 1997. On 1 June 1999, the complainant was granted a permanent residence
permit.
2.2

By judgment of 17 March 2000, the District Court of Norrköping found the

complainant guilty of several drug offenses and sentenced him to five years’
imprisonment. It also ordered the complainant’s expulsion from Sweden and
prohibited him from returning to the country before 1 January 2015. The Court so
decided after having sought an opinion from the Swedish Immigration Board, which
concluded that no impediment to the enforcement of an expulsion order existed. The
complainant did not appeal the judgment of the District Court.
2.3

The complainant began to serve his prison term on 6 April 2000; he was

released on probation on 25 April 2003. During this period, the “Association for the
Rights of Children to a Parent Sentenced to Expulsion” submitted two applications,
requesting the Government to revoke the expulsion order against the complainant,
under Chapter 7, Section 16 of the 1989 Aliens Act, on grounds of family unity; these
requests were rejected on 25 October 2001 and 15 August 2002, respectively. On 24
April 2003, based on a risk assessment made by the Swedish Migration Board, the
Government rejected a similar application submitted by the complainant.
The complaint:

3.1

The complainant claims that his forcible return to Iran would constitute a

violation by Sweden of article 3 of the Convention, since he would run a high risk of

Select target paragraph3