|
L.B. v. Lithuania (Application No. 38121/20)
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 |
|
Campaign Update, April - June 2019
July 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country News |
