Afghanistan

The applicant complained that the Slovakian authorities, having arrested him after he had crossed from Ukraine, had failed to inform him of the reasons for his arrest, in violation of Article 5 § 2 of the Convention. They had then returned him to Ukraine, where he had been detained in inadequate conditions in disregard of his alleged status as a minor, in breach of Article 3. He had been unable to participate effectively in the proceedings concerning his detention, and had eventually been returned to Afghanistan in the absence of an adequate assessment of the risks he had faced there, in breach of Article 3, Article 5 §§ 1, 2 and 4, and Article 13 of the Convention. Lastly, he alleged, under Article 34, that an NGO representative had been denied access to him in Ukraine, preventing him from lodging an application for an interim measure with the Court.

11 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): Children's rights - Expulsion - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Immigration Detention - Legal representation / Legal aid - Rejected asylum-seekers | Countries: Afghanistan - Slovakia - Ukraine

8 December 2015 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Children's rights - Expulsion - Right to family life | Countries: Afghanistan - Italy - Switzerland

3 August 2015 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae

2015 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae

26 November 2014 | Judicial Body: UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Children's rights - Deportation / Forcible return - Effective remedy - Expulsion - Right to family life | Countries: Afghanistan - Denmark

9 April 2014 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Court of Appeal (England and Wales) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Children's rights - Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness | Countries: Afghanistan - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

16 June 2013 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Document type: Case Law | Countries: Afghanistan - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

(1) Although there is a legal duty to give a brief explanation of the conclusions on the central issue on which an appeal is determined, those reasons need not be extensive if the decision as a whole makes sense, having regard to the material accepted by the judge. (2) Although a decision may contain an error of law where the requirements to give adequate reasons are not met, the Upper Tribunal would not normally set aside a decision of the First-tier Tribunal where there has been no misdirection of law, the fact-finding process cannot be criticised and the relevant Country Guidance has been taken into account, unless the conclusions the judge draws from the primary data were not reasonably open to him or her.

11 February 2013 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Children's rights - Credibility assessment | Countries: Afghanistan - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

16 March 2012 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Court of Appeal (England and Wales) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Children's rights - Unaccompanied / Separated children | Countries: Afghanistan - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Heard at Field House on 28 October 2010 and 23 May 2011.

6 January 2012 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Children's rights - Children-at-risk - Unaccompanied / Separated children | Countries: Afghanistan - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland