Report of the fact-finding mission to the Czech Republic by Ms Leyla Kayacik - Special Representative of the Secretary General on Migration and Refugees
4-6 May 2022
5 July 2022 | Publisher: Council of Europe | Document type: Fact Finding Reports |
Report of the fact-finding mission to the Slovak Republic
Ms Leyla Kayacik
Special Representative of the Secretary General on Migration and Refugees
2-4 May 2022
5 July 2022 | Publisher: Council of Europe | Document type: Fact Finding Reports |
M.A. v Valstybės sienos apsaugos tarnyba, Request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas, Case C-72/22 PPU
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 |
Opinion by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
for the Petition of 21-Jinjeong-0274200 submitted to the
National Human Rights Commission of Korea
December 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae |
UNHCR Note on the "Externalization" of International Protection
28 May 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Policy/Position Papers |
Annex to UNHCR Note on the "Externalization" of International Protection:
Policies and practices related to the externalization of international protection
28 May 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Policy/Position Papers |
Montenegro: Rulebook on House Rules in the Asylum Centre
27 May 2021 | Publisher: National Legislative Bodies / National Authorities | Document type: National Decrees, Circulars, Regulation, Policy Documents |
International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and European Council for Refugees
and Exiles (ECRE) v. Greece (decision on the merits)
26 January 2021 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Committee of Social Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Asylum policy - Children-at-risk - Economic, social and cultural rights - Reception | Countries: Greece |
TQ v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid, Case C‑441/19, request for preliminary ruling
1. Article 6(1) of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals, read in conjunction with Article 5(a) of that directive and Article 24(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that, before issuing a return decision against an unaccompanied minor, the Member State concerned must carry out a general and in-depth assessment of the situation of that minor, taking due account of the best interests of the child. In this context, that Member State must ensure that adequate reception facilities are available for the unaccompanied minor in question in the State of return. 2. Article 6(1) of Directive 2008/115, read in conjunction with Article 5(a) of that directive and in the light of Article 24(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that a Member State may not distinguish between unaccompanied minors solely on the basis of the criterion of their age for the purpose of ascertaining whether there are adequate reception facilities in the State of return. 3. Article 8(1) of Directive 2008/115 must be interpreted as precluding a Member State, after it has adopted a return decision in respect of an unaccompanied minor and has been satisfied, in accordance with Article 10(2) of that directive, that that minor will be returned to a member of his or her family, a nominated guardian or adequate reception facilities in the State of return, from refraining from subsequently removing that minor until he or she reaches the age of 18 years. 14 January 2021 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 2008 Returns Directive (EU) | Topic(s): Children's rights - Deportation / Forcible return - Reception - Unaccompanied / Separated children | Countries: Guinea - Netherlands |
Submission by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in the case of N.E. and Others v. Greece (Appl. no. 8716/20) before the European Court of Human Rights
11 November 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae |