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
- Access to procedures 4
- Arbitrary arrest and detention 4
- Asylum-seekers 4
- Children's rights 1
- Children-at-risk 1
- Decision on admissibility 1
- Deportation / Forcible return 7
- Effective remedy 10
- Exhaustion of domestic remedies 1
- Expulsion 9
- Family law 1
- Family reunification 1
- Flight by land, air or sea 1
- Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment 19
- Habeas corpus 2
- Hazara 1
- Illegal entry 1
- Immigration Detention 8
- Immigration law 1
- Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) 1
- Minorities 1
- National security / Public order 1
- Non-refoulement 4
- Persecution based on political opinion 1
- Persons with disabilities 1
- Prison or detention conditions 3
- Proof of nationality 1
- Reception 2
- Refoulement 3
- Refugee camps 1
- Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures 1
- Refugees 1
- Regional instruments 5
- Rejected asylum-seekers 1
- Religious discrimination 1
- Religious persecution (including forced conversion) 1
- Rescue at sea / Interception at sea 1
- Right to family life 6
- Right to liberty and security 5
- Right to life 1
- Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness 1
- Safe third country 5
- Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) 1
- Sharia law 2
- Sikh 1
- Single procedure 2
- Tajik 1
- Terrorism 1
- Transit 1
- Unaccompanied / Separated children 2
- Women's rights 1
- Women-at-risk 2
|
AFFAIRE KAAK ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE (Requête no 34215/16)
The case concerned the conditions of detention of Syrian, Afghan and Palestinian nationals in the “hotspots” of Vial and Souda (Greece), and the lawfulness of their detention in those camps. The Court considered that the authorities had done all that could reasonably be expected of them in the Vial camp to meet the obligation to provide care and protection to unaccompanied minors. The other applicants had been transferred immediately – or within ten days – from the Vial camp to the Souda camp. The Court also held that the conditions of detention in the Souda camp did not amount to inhuman or degrading treatment. The Court reiterated its previous finding that a period of one month’s detention in the Vial camp should not be considered excessive, given the time needed to comply with the relevant administrative formalities. In addition, the length of the applicants’ detention once they had expressed their wish to apply for asylum had been relatively short. In contrast, the applicants, who did not have legal assistance, had not been able to understand the content of the information brochure; in particular, they were unable to understand the material relating to the various appeal possibilities available under domestic law. 3 October 2019 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Access to procedures - Arbitrary arrest and detention - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Legal representation / Legal aid - Right to liberty and security | Countries: Afghanistan - Greece - Palestine, State of - Syrian Arab Republic |
|
Khan c. France (application no. 12267/16)
violation of article 3 (prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment). 28 February 2019 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Refugee camps - Unaccompanied / Separated children | Countries: Afghanistan - France - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland |
|
J.R. and Others v. Greece (AFFAIRE J.R. ET AUTRES c. GRÈCE)
The Court found in particular that the applicants had been deprived of their liberty for their first month in the centre, until 21 April 2016 when it became a semi-open centre. The Court was nevertheless of the view that the one-month period of detention, whose aim had been to guarantee the possibility of removing the applicants under the EU-Turkey Declaration, was not arbitrary and could not be regarded as “unlawful” within the meaning of Article 5 § 1 (f). However, the applicants had not been appropriately informed about the reasons for their arrest or the remedies available in order to challenge that detention. 25 January 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Prison or detention conditions - Right to liberty and security | Countries: Afghanistan - Greece |
|
M.M. and Others v. The Netherlands
Linked applications: 26268/09, 33314/09 and 53926/09 19 June 2017 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Decision on admissibility - Effective remedy - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Right to family life - Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness | Countries: Afghanistan - Netherlands |
|
A.M. v. the Netherlands
5 July 2016 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Exhaustion of domestic remedies - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Hazara - Persecution based on political opinion | Countries: Afghanistan - Netherlands |
|
Sakir c. Grèce
24 March 2016 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Access to procedures - Illegal entry | Countries: Afghanistan - Greece |
|
Z.H. and R.H. v. Switzerland
8 December 2015 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Children's rights - Expulsion - Right to family life | Countries: Afghanistan - Italy - Switzerland |
|
N.M. c. Roumanie
10 February 2015 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Access to procedures - Expulsion - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Prison or detention conditions - Terrorism | Countries: Afghanistan - Romania |
|
Tarakhel v. Switzerland
4 November 2014 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Asylum-seekers - Children-at-risk - Deportation / Forcible return - Flight by land, air or sea - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Reception - Regional instruments - Right to family life | Countries: Afghanistan - Italy - Pakistan - Switzerland |
|
Sharifi et autres c. Italie et Grèce
21 October 2014 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Access to procedures - Effective remedy - Expulsion - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Non-refoulement - Refoulement - Rescue at sea / Interception at sea | Countries: Afghanistan - Eritrea - Greece - Italy - Sudan |
