Private psychologist opinions indicated that, deportation to the country of origin would break peer ties that children had, not without a difficulty, established. It could lead to their loss of security and, in consequence, to a serious violation of children’s rights.
The Head of the Office for Foreigners, by the decision of 9 March 2020, no. DL.WIPO.412.61.2019.HJ, granted to a family residence permit for humanitarian reason, due to the fact that their deportation would lead to violation of children’s rights to a degree that significantly threatens their psychophysical development.
The decison indicated that four oldest children had been continuously fulfilling their schooling obligation in Poland since 2016, „they have integrated with their peer community, found approval and trust in it, they feel good in Poland, achieve good academic results and are willing to participate in social activities and are involved in extracurricular activities.”
The second-instance authority considered above all the best interests of children, whose rights to proper psychophysical development could be violated to a significant extent upon return:
The main argument in favour of such a decision is to prevent the breach of ties that children have not easily established in the Polish community and the loss of the sense of security that they have acquired during their previous stay in Poland, which plays a very important role in the psychophysical development of children.
It is worth noting that by the decision of 19 December 2018, the Commander of the Border Guard Post in Warsaw obliged the family to return, pointing out that the psychological opinion prepared on the order of the Border Guard by a child psychologist indicated that children were not sufficiently integrated with the Polish society. The first instance authority ignored opinions issued by the school attended by children which were in contradiction with the opinion prepared on the order of the Border Guard. Contrary to the authority of the first instance, the Head of the Office for Foreigners found relevant the psychological and community opinions in the case files concerning children and their parents, from which follows that:
the execution of the appealed decision could be very likely associated with a significant threat to the proper psychophysical development of children and would violate the right of migrants to family and private life.
As a consequence, the Head of the Office for Foreigners granted permission to stay for humanitarian reasons, referring to the premises indicated in Article 348 paragraph. 2 and 3 of the Act on foreigners.
Legal assistance was provided by the legal counsel Magdalena Sadowska.