Safi and Others v. Greece (Application no. 5418/15)
This case concerned the sinking on 20 January 2014 of a fishing boat transporting 27 foreign nationals in the Aegean Sea, off the island of Farmakonisi, resulting in the death of 11 people, including relatives of the applicants. The Court found violations of Article 2 (right to life) and Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment). 7 July 2022 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Rescue at sea / Interception at sea | Countries: Afghanistan - Greece - Palestine, State of - Syrian Arab Republic |
cases nos. 202106573/1 and 202105784/1
6 July 2022 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: Council of State (Raad van State) | Topic(s): Refoulement | Countries: Denmark - Netherlands - Syrian Arab Republic |
Switzerland: Judgement E-2943/2019 of 6 July 2022
On 6 July 2022, the Swiss Federal Administrative Court republished its judgment of 6 July 2022, E-2943/2019, as a reference judgment due to its particular relevance for similar cases. The case concerned military service in Syria, and confirmed that refusing to perform military service or leaving Syria illegally do not give rise to a well-founded fear absent other risk-impacting circumstances. 6 July 2022 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription | Countries: Switzerland |
Case of A.B. and Others v. Poland (Application no. 42907/17)
The present case concerns refusal of border guards to receive the applicants’ asylum applications and summary removal to a third country, with a risk of refoulement to and ill-treatment in the country origin. 30 June 2022 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Rejection at border | Countries: Belarus - Poland - Russian Federation |
Case of A.I. and Others v. Poland (Application no. 39028/17)
The present case concerns refusal of border guards to receive the applicants’ asylum applications and summary removal to a third country, with a risk of refoulement to and ill-treatment in the country origin. 30 June 2022 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Rejection at border | Countries: Belarus - Poland - Russian Federation |
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 | 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 |
Berdica (Deprivation of citizenship: consideration) Albania [2022] UKUT 00276 (IAC)
1. In deprivation of citizenship appeals, consideration is to be given both to the sustainability of the original decision and also whether upon considering subsequent evidence the Secretary of State's maintenance of her decision up to and including the hearing of the appeal is also sustainable. The latter requires an appellant to establish that the Secretary of State could not now take the same view. 2. Decisions of the Upper Tribunal are binding on the First-tier Tribunal, not only in the individual case by virtue of section 12 of the Tribunal, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, but also as a matter of precedent. 28 June 2022 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Topic(s): Citizenship / Nationality law - Withdrawal of nationality | Countries: Albania - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland |
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 | Topic(s): Travel documents | Countries: Lithuania |
CASE OF ECODEFENCE AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications nos. 9988/13 and 60 others – see appended list)
1. The present cases concern restrictions on the freedom of expression and association of Russian non-governmental organisations (NGOs) which have been categorised as “foreign agents” funded by “foreign sources” and exercising “political activity”. 14 June 2022 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Freedom of assembly and association - Freedom of expression | Countries: Russian Federation |
AFFAIRE M.A.M. c. SUISSE (Requête no 29836/20)
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 | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Expulsion - Freedom of religion - Religious persecution (including forced conversion) | Countries: Pakistan - Switzerland |