Human rights / Arbitrary arrest and detention

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

Mr. Orosmán Marcelino Cabrera Barnés alleges that on 7 February 2006 he escaped from Cuba for political reasons together with a contingent of people on a boat that, a few days later, broke down and was rescued by a cruise ship bound for Mexico. He adds that on 17 February of the same year, upon arriving in Mexican territory, he was arrested by the authorities of the National Institute of Migration (INM) at the Chetumal migrant holding centre in the state of Quintana Roo. He points out that these authorities interviewed him, told him that he would not be deported, that he could remain for a period of no more than 90 days as established by the law in force at the time of the events, and that they would give him an exit order to leave Mexican territory in a reasonable time. The petitioner maintains that he was then transferred to the "Siglo XXI" migrant holding center located in Tapachula (Chiapas), where he did not have a court-appointed lawyer. He states that he was subjected to adverse conditions of detention as he was confined 24 hours without being able to sunbathe and without being able to make telephone calls, that the food was of poor quality and that he could not bathe every day. According to the documentation provided by the alleged victim, on 21 April and 8 May 2006, he applied for refuge before the local delegation of the Mexican Commission for Aid to Refugees (COMAR), as the competent State agency for this procedure, where he was assured that for the duration of the process he would not be deported for the safety of his freedom and life. According to the file, the COMAR delegate in Chiapas brought both requests to the attention of the INM on 4 and 8 May 2006, respectively. In response to the State's allegations, it states that on no occasion was it abandoning those requests.

26 October 2017 | Judicial Body: Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention | Countries: Mexico

5 September 2017 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Asylum-seekers - Residence permits / Residency - Right to liberty and security | Countries: Türkiye - Uzbekistan

31 May 2017 | Judicial Body: Bangladesh: Supreme Court | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Non-refoulement - Refugee camps - Right to liberty and security | Countries: Bangladesh - Myanmar

4 April 2017 | 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 - Immigration Detention - Right to liberty and security | Countries: Belgium - Egypt

Advance unedited version

3 April 2017 | Judicial Body: UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Deportation / Forcible return - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Freedom of religion - Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) - Persecution on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity | Countries: Denmark - Malaysia

27 January 2017 | Judicial Body: UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Effective remedy - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Legal representation / Legal aid | Countries: Uzbekistan

26 January 2017 | 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 - Deportation / Forcible return - Physical harm - Political asylum - Prison or detention conditions - Tamil | Countries: Sri Lanka - Switzerland