Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights
The Court is currently made up of 47 judges, one in principle for every State signed up to the Convention. They are elected by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and serve for six years. Judges sit on the Court as individuals and do not represent their country. Website: www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=home
- Case Law 22
- Country Reports 1
- Access to procedures 2
- Administrative courts 2
- Arbitrary arrest and detention 1
- Citizenship / Nationality law 1
- Decision on admissibility 4
- Denial of nationality 1
- Deportation / Forcible return 5
- Diplomatic assurances 1
- Disappeared persons 1
- Discrimination based on race, nationality, ethnicity 3
- Economic, social and cultural rights 2
- Effective remedy 4
- Elections 3
- Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment 3
- Freedom of movement 2
- Housing, land and property rights (HLP) 1
- Immigration Detention 5
- Immigration law 2
- Jew 2
- Jurisdiction 1
- Naturalization 1
- Non-refoulement 2
- Persons with disabilities 1
- Proof of nationality 1
- Property restitution 1
- Public health 1
- Racism / Xenophobia / Hate Crimes 1
- Rejected asylum-seekers 1
- Residence permits / Residency 1
- Right to employment 2
- Right to family life 3
- Right to justice 1
- Right to liberty and security 6
- Right to life 2
- Rights of non-citizens 3
- Roma 6
- Statelessness 3
|
Jakupovic v. Austria
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 subject to editorial revision. The applicant is a national of Bosnia Herzegovina who went to Austria in 1991 to join his mother who was already living and working there. Following several criminal offences (burglary, possession of arms) he was issued with a 10 year residence prohibition in 1995. This decision was confirmed in successive appeals and the applicant was deported to Bosnia Herzegovina in 1997. Before the Court, the applicant complained that the residence prohibition constituted an interference with his right to family life and consequently a violation of Art. 8 § 1 of the ECHR. The Court indicated that its task in such cases was to determine whether a fair balance was struck between the States' interests (prevention of crime) and the applicant's rights. In this case, the Court noted that the applicant was 16 when he was expelled. Moreover, Bosnia had just been through a conflict and the applicant's father has been reported missing since the end of the conflict. There was no evidence that he still had relatives living there. Turning to the criminal offences, the Court considered that while the applicant was convicted twice for burglary, he was only given conditional sentences of imprisonment. Moreover, there were no indications that he made use of the arms for which he received a prohibition of possession. Based on all these elements, the Court decided the Austrian authorities did not strike a fair balance between the interests at stake. Consequently there was a violation of Art. 8 of the ECHR. 6 May 2003 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Residence permits / Residency | Countries: Austria - Bosnia and Herzegovina |
|
Sejdovic et Sulejmanovic c. Italie
14 March 2002 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Decision on admissibility | Countries: Bosnia and Herzegovina - Italy |
|
Sejdovic et autres c. Italie
14 June 2001 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Decision on admissibility | Countries: Bosnia and Herzegovina - Italy |
