Submitted by crinadmin on
Title Court/Judicial Body: Citation: Date: Instruments Cited: Summary: The Committee considered all applications on behalf of the child inadmissible on the grounds that Mr. Sahid had not obtained his grandson's authorisation to represent him in this communication. With regards to Mr. Sahid's claim that his deportation would unjustifiably break up the family unit, the Committee dismissed this argument on the basis that his grandson would remain in New Zealand in the custody of his mother and her husband. Link to Full Judgement: This summary is provided by the Child Rights International Network for educational and informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice.
Mohammed Sahid and ors. v. New Zealand
Human Rights Committee
Communication No. 893/1999
28 August 1998
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Art. 23(1): protection of the family
Art. 24(1): special protection of the child and non-discrimination
Mr. Sahid, a Fijian citizen, was the father of Jamila and grandfather of her son, a New Zealand citizen. Mr. Sahid entered New Zealand on a temporary permit to visit his daughter and grandson, and remained in the country until he was deported ten years later following a series of appeals. He argued that the interests of the child lay in maintaining the family unit, including himself, and that since he was the primary caregiver of his grandson, to deport him would discriminate against his grandson. He also argued that his deportation would break up the family unit in contravention of article 24.
http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/DER/G03/411/71/PDF/G0341171.pdf?OpenElement