Κείμενο
The contradiction
The core contradiction is simple and serious. The applicant held an identity card that remained legally valid under domestic law. Yet the passport authorities treated that same document as insufficient for passport issuance.
A State governed by the rule of law cannot safely operate on the basis that a document is valid in principle but unusable in practice whenever the administration chooses. That is not legal certainty. It is administrative instability.
The continuing harm
This was not a one-time inconvenience. The applicant remained without a passport, without immediate relief and without a practical way to end the restriction quickly. The consequences continued over time.
The refusal reportedly affected lawful international professional activity, financial and business verification procedures, and caused substantial personal pressure, uncertainty and disruption. The harm was continuing, concrete and serious.
This case matters because it raises broader institutional questions. Was there a truly effective remedy? Was the continuing nature of the interference properly appreciated? Was the contradiction in the authorities’ position examined with sufficient care? This page calls for independent legal scrutiny. A case may be formally closed and yet remain open in the conscience of the rule of law when serious questions of arbitrariness, effectiveness and substantive justice remain unanswered.Why this case matters