Facts
On April 4, 2006, the Federal Office for Migration rejected the asylum application of X., a national of Serbia and Montenegro, born in 1966. X. appealed this decision to the Swiss Asylum Appeals Commission, which authorized him to remain in Switzerland pending the outcome of the procedure. On November 30, 2009, the Federal Administrative Court dismissed the asylum appeal.
On September 30, 2009, X. filed an application for a residence permit with the Cantonal Population Office of the Canton of Geneva, pursuant to Art. 14 para. 2 of the Asylum Act. On November 9, 2009, the Cantonal Population Office informed X. that it was not willing to submit the file to the Federal Office for Migration to regularize his stay.
On January 27, 2010, X. appealed this decision to the Cantonal Administrative Appeals Commission of the Canton of Geneva. The Commission declared the appeal inadmissible, on the grounds that X. did not have the status of a party to contest the refusal of the Cantonal Population Office. This decision was confirmed by the Administrative Court of the Canton of Geneva on June 22, 2010. X. filed a subsidiary constitutional appeal, which the Federal Tribunal rejected.
Considerations
The Federal Tribunal considered that the public law appeal was inadmissible, as X. did not have a right to obtain a residence permit and therefore did not have a protected legal position conferring the status to act on the merits.
However, the Federal Tribunal admitted the admissibility of the subsidiary constitutional appeal, insofar as X. could complain that he had been denied the status of a party in the cantonal procedure.
On the merits, the Federal Tribunal found that the lack of a judicial remedy against the decision of the cantonal administration refusing to open a procedure for a…