Case Law

Relying on Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy), the applicant complained that if removed to Sudan he would be at risk of forced recruitment, persecution because he belonged to a non-Arab ethnic group from Darfur, and more generally, on account of the humanitarian situation in Sudan as a result of the conflict in Darfur. No violation of Article 3 – in the event of the applicant’s removal to Sudan No violation of Article 13 taken together with Article 3

2 June 2020 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Effective remedy - Expulsion - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Racial / Ethnic persecution - Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness | Countries: Netherlands - Sudan

Intervention orale du HCR devant la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme Audience dans l'affaire I.M. c. France, 17 mai 2011 ; Observations actualisées du Haut Commissariat des Nations Unies pour les réfugiés devant la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme dans l'affaire I. M. c. France, requête no. 9152/09, 31 mars 2011; Observations écrites du Haut Commissariat des Nations Unies pour les réfugiés devant la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme dans l'affaire I. M. c/ France, requête no. 9152/09, septembre 2009.

2 February 2012 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Effective remedy - Expedited procedures - Immigration Detention - Non-refoulement - Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness - Suspensive effect | Countries: France - Sudan