|
I.A. v. Hungary (Application No. 38297/17)
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the case. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list and to discontinue the application of Rule 39 of the Rules of Court. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases. 16 November 2021 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Illegal entry - Immigration Detention - Unaccompanied / Separated children | Countries: Afghanistan - Hungary |
|
Commission v Hungary (Accueil des demandeurs de protection internationale) C-808/18
Hungary has failed to fulfil its obligations: – in providing that applications for international protection from third-country nationals or stateless persons who, arriving from Serbia, wish to access, in its territory, the international protection procedure, may be made only in the transit zones of Röszke and Tompa, while adopting a consistent and generalised administrative practice drastically limiting the number of applicants authorised to enter those transit zones daily; – in establishing a system of systematic detention of applicants for international protection in the transit zones of Röszke and Tompa, without observing the guarantees provided for in Article 24(3) and Article 43 of Directive 2013/32 and Articles 8, 9 and 11 of Directive 2013/33; – in allowing the removal of all third-country nationals staying illegally in its territory, with the exception of those of them who are suspected of having committed a criminal offence, without observing the procedures and safeguards laid down in Article 5, Article 6(1), Article 12(1) and Article 13(1) of Directive 2008/115; – in making the exercise by applicants for international protection who fall within the scope of Article 46(5) of Directive 2013/32 of their right to remain in its territory subject to conditions contrary to EU law. 17 December 2020 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Access to procedures - Illegal entry - Immigration Detention | Countries: Hungary |
|
The Hungarian Helsinki Committee's opinion on the Governments amendments to criminal law
related to the sealed border
September 2015 | Publisher: Hungarian Helsinki Committee | Document type: Legal Articles/Analyses/Commentaries |
|
Resolution 6/2015 (II.25.) of the Constitutional Court on the determination whether the term „lawfully" in Section 76(1) of Act II of 2007 on the conditions of Entry and Stay of Third-Country Nationals is contrary to the Fundamental Act and the annulment thereof
This is an unofficial translation prepared by Afford Fordító- és Tolmácsiroda Kft. with proofreading by UNHCR Hungary Unit. The official decision in Hungarian is attached. Publication date: 25 February March 2015 (in the Official Gazette (Magyar Közlöny) no. 22 of 2015), date of issuance of the decision: 23 February 2015 25 February 2015 | Judicial Body: Hungary: Constitutional Court | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Illegal entry - Statelessness | Countries: Hungary |
