UNHCR is not responsible for the content and availability of non-UNHCR websites. Content displays in a new window.
AFFAIRE M.A. c. BELGIQUE (Requête no 19656/18)
The case concerned the applicant’s removal to Sudan by the Belgian authorities in spite of a court decision ordering the suspension of the measure. The Court found in particular that on account of procedural defects attributable to the Belgian authorities prior to the applicant’s removal to Sudan, he had been prevented from pursuing the asylum application that he had lodged in Belgium and the Belgian authorities had not sufficiently assessed the real risks that he faced in Sudan. In addition, by deporting the applicant in spite of the court order to suspend the measure, the authorities had rendered ineffective the applicant’s successful appeal. 27 October 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): Deportation / Forcible return - Effective remedy - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures - Suspensive effect | Countries: Belgium - Sudan |
CASE OF S.A. v. THE NETHERLANDS
(Application no. 49773/15)
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 | Document type: Case Law | 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 |
Esther Segai Gersagher et al. v. the Knesset et al.
The Court is requested to order the voidness of section 4 of the Prevention of Infiltration and Ensuring the Departure of Infiltrators from Israel 5775-2014 (Legislative Amendments and Temporary Provisions) 5775-2014 (hereinafter: the "Amending Law") that obliges foreign workers who entered Israel not through a border crossing (hereinafter: "Infiltrator Workers") and their employers to deposit in a special bank account a total amount at a rate of 36% of the worker's wages that will be paid to the worker only at the time of his departure from Israel (hereinafter: the "Deposit Scheme"). In short, the Petitioners argue that the Deposit Scheme, in general, or in the least some of its components, is unconstitutional and therefore should be voided. 23 April 2020 | Judicial Body: Israel: High Court of Justice | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Administrative law - Asylum-seekers - Constitutional law - Illegal entry - Non-refoulement | Countries: Eritrea - Israel - Sudan |
Esther Segai Gersagher et al v. The Knesset et al
23 April 2020 | Judicial Body: Israel: High Court of Justice | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Economic, social and cultural rights - Illegal entry - Immigration law - Right to employment | Countries: Eritrea - Israel - Sudan |
Consolidated Action Plan of ICGLR on the eradication of statelessness in the Great Lakes (2017-2024)
January 2020 | Publisher: Regional Treaties, Agreements, Declarations and Related | Document type: Resolutions/Recommendations/Declarations |
Draft Constitutional Charter for the 2019 Transitional Period
4 August 2019 | Publisher: National Legislative Bodies / National Authorities | Document type: National Legislation |
AAR & AA (Non-Arab Darfuris – return) Sudan [2019] UKUT 00282 (IAC)
The situation in Sudan remains volatile after civil protests started in late 2018 and the future is unpredictable. There is insufficient evidence currently available to show that the guidance given in AA (non-Arab Darfuris - relocation) Sudan CG [2009] UKAIT 00056 and MM (Darfuris) Sudan CG [2015] UKUT 00010 (IAC) requires revision. Those cases should still be followed. 29 July 2019 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Country of origin information (COI) - Darfuri | Countries: Sudan - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland |
BVerfG, Beschluss der 1. Kammer des Zweiten Senats
25 February 2019 | Judicial Body: Germany: Bundesverfassungsgericht | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Effective remedy - Manifestly unfounded / Clearly abusive claims | Countries: Germany - Sudan |
The Sudanese Nationality Act 1994 and Sudanese Nationality Act (Amendment) 2011 and 2018
30 December 2018 | Publisher: National Legislative Bodies / National Authorities | Document type: National Legislation |
AFFAIRE A.E.A. c. GRÈCE (Requête no 39034/12)
The possibility of introducing an asylum claim is a conditio sine qua non for the effective protection of persons in need of international protection. If authorities do not guarantee unhindered access to the asylum procedure, asylum-seekers can not make use of the procedural rights foreseen within the asylum procedure and are at risk of being arrested at any time. Hence even if the asylum procedure offers effective safeguards, these are of no use if, as in the present case, the asylum claim is not registered for a long period of time. [85] violation of article 13 (effective remedy) in combination with article 3 ECHR. 15 March 2018 | 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): Access to procedures - Effective protection - Effective remedy - Registration | Countries: Egypt - Greece - Sudan - Turkey |