Facts
The complainants, [S.D.] and [M.D.] , a married couple from Macedonia, had lived in Switzerland. [S.D.] had originally come to Switzerland as a seasonal worker and had later received a yearly residence permit for gainful employment as a helper mason. However, after an occupational accident, he was no longer able to pursue gainful employment. His residence permit was last extended until April 14, 2000. [M.D.] had entered Switzerland with a visa for a visitor's stay and had subsequently stayed in Switzerland.
The Directorate for Social Affairs and Security of the Canton of Zurich rejected the application for extension of the residence permit for [S.D.] and set him a deadline to leave the cantonal territory. [S.D.] appealed to the Government Council of the Canton of Zurich against this ruling. The Government Council rejected the appeal.
Against the decision of the Government Council, the complainants lodged a constitutional complaint with the Federal Court. They claimed that the refusal of the residence permit and the expulsion violated the prohibition of discrimination, the right to respect for family life, and the prohibition of inhuman treatment.
Considerations
The Federal Court first examined whether the complainants had a legal claim to the issuance or extension of the residence permit. It found that the complainants had no claim to the issuance or extension of the residence permit under the provisions of domestic statutory law or a bilateral state treaty.
The Federal Court rejected the complainants' objection that the refusal of the residence permit and the expulsion violated the prohibition of discrimination. It found that the practice of not extending the residence permit of foreigners who are no longer able to work and who were originally admitted for…