The appellant (X.) had been accused of migrant smuggling. Specifically, on 26 February 2000, the police at the border control of Roissy Charles de Gaulle, Paris (France), detected a passenger - the appellant – in provenance from Douala (Cameroon) -  with a plane ticket Douala-Paris-Douala. She was travelling with three children with plane tickets Douala-Paris. All four individuals were travelling under the Cameroonian passport of X, which had attached the photos of the three minors. X. declared the minors were her children. However, through investigations, it appeared the children had joined her only in Douala.

X. admitted not having initiated the procedure of familial reunification as applicable under French law because (i) her situation in the country was not stabilised, (ii) she did not have the means to provide for the children in the long term, (iii) her apartment in France was not sufficiently spacious to accommodate the children.

 

Authorities refused entry in France to the three children. They were flown back to Douala on 26 February 2000.

 

The appellant provided the birth certificates of the children whereby she appeared as their mother.

 

The appellant initiated the administrative procedure of familial reunification. The request was refused on 17 May 2001 given the precarious financial conditions of the appellant. She presented an appeal in relation thereto.

 

In ascertaining the facts, authorities relied on testimonial and documental evidence.

 

The Tribunal de grande instance de Bobigny (France) convicted the appellant of “assisting the irregular entry, transit and stay of a foreigner in France”. The Court of Appeal of Paris reversed the decision.

 

For further details see “History of Proceedings” and “Commentary”.