An application by a Syrian man who took up residence in Malta in 1997, and became a Maltese citizen in 2002, claiming that the refusal of a permit to his children was discriminatory was dismissed by Mr Justice Lino Farrugia Sacco.

Ghasan Kaseb filed an application in the Constitutional Court, where he insisted that as a Maltese citizen he was being denied the right to enjoy his children, because of their Syrian nationality.

He requested that the court find this behaviour, ordering his daughter, Adel Kaseb, to return to Syria with her husband and son, discriminatory and against the European Convention of Human Rights.

He also requested that the court find the order to his daughter, her husband Nadim Abouzidan and their son to leave Malta as ‘null’ and ‘without effect’, and that they are awarded compensation.

Mr Kaseb, who had married a Maltese woman, had four children in Syria, Adal, Nader, Maher and Thear, who had all followed their father to Malta.

Thear Kaseb is in Malta legally, reading for a degree at the University of Malta, and the other three were granted freedom of movement, as long as they remained dependent on their father, who was also director of a company, Al Hayfaa Ltd.

However the court pointed out that Mr Kaseb had failed to reveal that his daughter, Adel, was married and thus the permit was mistakenly granted as she was not dependent on her father.

Mr Kaseb was informed through a letter, dated 7 December 2006, that his daughter would have to leave the island at the age of 21, which was on 16 March 2007.

The court ruled that the Syrian family brought no proof of the fact that they were being discriminated against on basis of their country of origin, but rather were being allowed to regularise their staying in Malta.

In fact the two were allowed to stay after alleged claims of complications in her pregnancy, and even in the months after the birth, until the necessary arrangements to travel were made.

When speaking of discrimination, one must prove that the claimants’ treatment was different to that provided to others in the same situation. This leads to the conclusion that there was no discrimination, the court said.

It was proven that the young family are Syrian citizens, where the husband has property and a job and where the majority of his family, and the girl’s mother, resides.