Last Updated: Friday, 05 November 2021, 15:03 GMT
Refworld Home
Latest Refworld Updates for Russian Federation RSS feed

Russian Federation - flag Russian Federation

UNHCR is not responsible for the content and availability of non-UNHCR websites. Content displays in a new window.

Filter:
Showing 1-10 of 12,010 results
CASE OF M.D. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 71321/17 and 9 others – see appended list)

Relying on Article 2 (right to life) and Article 3 (prohibition on inhuman or degrading treatment), the applicants complain that their expulsion to Syria would put them at grave physical risk. Some of the applicants also complain under Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) that they had no effective domestic remedies in respect of their complaints under Articles 2 and 3 that their detention pending removal was arbitrary and the examination of their complaints against detention orders was not speedy.

14 September 2021 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Effective remedy - Expulsion - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Non-refoulement - Right to life | Countries: Russian Federation - Syrian Arab Republic

Campaign Update, January 2021 - March 2021

15 April 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country News

Grand Chamber Admissibility Decision in the case of Ukraine v. Russia (re Crimea) (app nos 20958/14 and 38334/18)

14 January 2021 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Decision on admissibility | Countries: Russian Federation - Ukraine

Campaign Update, July 2020 - September 2020

14 October 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country News

Supreme Administrative Court decision of 10 September 2020 - KHO:2020:94

10 September 2020 | Judicial Body: Finland: Supreme Administrative Court | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Freedom of religion - Religious persecution (including forced conversion) | Countries: Finland - Russian Federation

Campaign Update, April 2020 - June 2020

16 July 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country News

AFFAIRE N.H. ET AUTRES c. FRANCE (Requête no 28820/13 et 2 autres)

The French authorities had failed in their duties under domestic law. They were found responsible for the conditions in which the applicants had been living for several months: sleeping rough, without access to sanitary facilities, having no means of subsistence and constantly in fear of being attacked or robbed. The applicants had thus been victims of degrading treatment, showing a lack of respect for their dignity. The Court found that such living conditions, combined with the lack of an appropriate response from the French authorities and the fact that the domestic courts had systematically objected that the competent bodies lacked resources in the light of their status as single young men, had exceeded the threshold of severity for the purposes of Article 3 of the Convention. The three applicants N.H., K.T. and A.J. had thus found themselves, through the fault of the French authorities, in a situation that was incompatible with Article 3 of the Convention.

2 July 2020 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Reception - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures | Countries: Afghanistan - France - Georgia - Iran, Islamic Republic of - Russian Federation

AFFAIRE BILALOVA ET AUTRES c. POLOGNE (Requête no 23685/14)

Relying in particular on Article 5 § 1 (f) (right to liberty and security), the applicants complained about their placement and retention in the closed centre for aliens, alleging, inter alia, that they were illegal. Violation of Article 5 § 1 f) – in respect of the applicant children, concerning their retention in the closed centre

26 March 2020 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Children's rights - Expulsion - Rejected asylum-seekers - Right to liberty and security | Countries: Germany - Poland - Russian Federation

CASE OF N.M. v. RUSSIA (Application no. 29343/18)

The Court applied the relevant general principles established in its jurisprudence in the case of F.G. v. Sweden (no. 43611/11) and in the context of removals from Russia to Central Asian States in Mamazhonov v. Russia (no. 17239/13): a) When examining the existence of substantial grounds for believing that the applicant faces a real risk of ill-treatment, the Court recalled that individuals whose extradition was sought by the Uzbek authorities on charges of religiously or politically motivated crimes constituted vulnerable groups facing a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention in the event of their removal to Uzbekistan. The Court found that the applicant was accused of religiously motivated crimes on the basis of documents from the Uzbek authorities. It further considered that the Russian authorities had at their disposal sufficiently substantiated complaints pointing to a real risk of ill-treatment (§15-18). b) With respect to the duty to assess claims of a real risk of ill-treatment through reliance on sufficient relevant material, the Court concluded that the Russian authorities failed to assess the applicant’s claim adequately. The Court paid particular attention to the fact that domestic authorities did not carry out a rigorous scrutiny of the applicant’s and to the national courts’ simplistic rejections of the applicant’s claims (§19-21). c) On the existence of a real risk of ill-treatment or danger to life in their countries of origin, the Court reiterated that it has consistently concluded that the removal of an applicant charged with religiously motivated crimes in Uzbekistan exposes that applicant to a real risk of ill-treatment there (see for example: T.M. and Others v. Russia, no. 31189/15) (§22-23).

3 December 2019 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment | Countries: Kazakhstan - Russian Federation - Uzbekistan

USING CRIMINAL LAW TO RESTRICT THE WORK OF NGOS SUPPORTING REFUGEES AND OTHER MIGRANTS IN COUNCIL OF EUROPE MEMBER STATES

December 2019 | Publisher: Council of Europe | Document type: Thematic Reports

Search Refworld

Advanced Search | Search Tips
UNHCR logo