Immigration law

Le requérant considère qu’un éloignement vers la Fédération de Russie l’exposerait à des traitements contraires à l’article 2 § 1 de la Convention. 86. Il considère également que l’exécution de l’arrêté d’expulsion entraînerait une violation de l’article 8 de la Convention. 87. Enfin, le requérant se plaint de ne pas avoir bénéficié en droit français d’un recours effectif pour faire valoir ses griefs tirés des articles 2, 3 et 8 au mépris de l’article 13 de la Convention. 88. Eu égard aux faits de l’espèce, aux arguments des parties et à la conclusion à laquelle la Cour est parvenue sur le terrain de l’article 3 de la Convention, elle estime avoir examiné la principale question juridique soulevée par la requête. La Cour en conclut qu’il n’y a pas lieu de statuer séparément sur les autres griefs (Centre de ressources juridiques au nom de Valentin Câmpeanu c. Roumanie [GC], no 47848/08, § 156, CEDH 2014).

30 August 2022 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return | Countries: France - Russian Federation

This case concerned age-assessment procedures and the placement in adult detention centres of two minors who arrived in Italy.

21 July 2022 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Immigration Detention - Prison or detention conditions - Unaccompanied / Separated children | Countries: Gambia - Guinea - Italy

The Court, ruling under the urgent preliminary ruling procedure, holds that the Procedures Directive (4) precludes legislation of a Member State under which, in the event of a declaration of a state of war or a state of emergency or in the event of a declaration of an emergency due to a mass influx of foreigners, illegally staying third-country nationals are, de facto, denied the opportunity of having access to the procedure for examining an application for international protection in the territory of that Member State. Furthermore, the Court holds that the Reception Directive (5) precludes legislation of a Member State under which, in the event of such a declaration, an applicant for asylum may be detained on the sole ground that he or she is staying in the territory of that Member State illegally.

30 June 2022 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 2013 Recast Asylum Procedures Directive (EU) | Topic(s): Immigration Detention - Reception - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures - Right to liberty and security - State of emergency | Countries: Lithuania

Accordingly, the Court finds that the refusal to issue the applicant with an alien’s passport was taken without carrying out a balancing exercise and without ensuring that such a measure was justified and proportionate in his individual situation (see, mutatis mutandis, Pfeifer, cited above, § 57). That refusal was based on formalistic grounds, namely that he had not demonstrated that he was personally at risk of persecution and that he was not considered a beneficiary of asylum at that time, without adequate examination of the situation in his country of origin, as well as on the purported possibility of obtaining a Russian passport, without any assessment of whether that possibility was accessible to him in practice in view of his particular circumstances. 97. In the light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that it has not been demonstrated that the interference with the applicant’s right to freedom of movement was necessary in a democratic society. 98. There has accordingly been a violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention.

16 June 2022 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Travel documents | Countries: Lithuania

3 May 2022 | Publisher: New Zealand: Immigration Service | Document type: Research, Background and Discussion Papers

30 April 2022 | Publisher: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law Compilations/Analyses

30 April 2022 | Publisher: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law Compilations/Analyses

1. La requête concerne le possible renvoi au Pakistan du requérant, ressortissant de ce pays, s’étant converti de l’islam au christianisme en Suisse, suite au rejet de sa demande d’asile. Le requérant se plaint que son renvoi lui ferait courir un risque réel pour sa vie ou d’être soumis à des mauvais traitements et que sa liberté de religion serait considérablement entravée.

26 April 2022 | 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): Expulsion - Freedom of religion - Religious persecution (including forced conversion) | Countries: Pakistan - Switzerland

This decision replaces all existing country guidance on Iraq.

22 April 2022 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 2011 Recast Qualification Directive (EU) | Topic(s): EU Qualification Directive - Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) - Kurd - Travel documents | Countries: Iraq - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland