UNHCR is not responsible for the content and availability of non-UNHCR websites. Content displays in a new window.
#IBelong Campaign Update, October – December 2021
1 February 2022 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports |
UNHCR Fact Sheet: The 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness
25 August 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports |
#IBelong Campaign Update, April 2021 - June 2021
9 July 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country News |
Campaign Update, January 2021 - March 2021
15 April 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country News |
Campaign Update, October 2020 - December 2020
11 January 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country News |
Campaign Update, July 2020 - September 2020
14 October 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country News |
High-Level Segment on Statelessness: Results and Highlights
May 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports |
Campaign Update, January 2020 - March 2020
22 April 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country News |
CASE OF N.D. AND N.T. v. SPAIN
(Applications nos. 8675/15 and 8697/15) (Grand Chamber)
The case concerned the immediate return to Morocco of two nationals of Mali and Côte d’Ivoire who on 13 August 2014 attempted to enter Spanish territory in an unauthorised manner by climbing the fences surrounding the Spanish enclave of Melilla on the North African coast. The Court considered that the applicants had in fact placed themselves in an unlawful situation when they had deliberately attempted to enter Spain on 13 August 2014 by crossing the Melilla border protection structures as part of a large group and at an unauthorised location, taking advantage of the group’s large numbers and using force. They had thus chosen not to use the legal procedures which existed in order to enter Spanish territory lawfully. Consequently, the Court considered that the lack of individual removal decisions could be attributed to the fact that the applicants – assuming that they had wished to assert rights under the Convention – had not made use of the official entry procedures existing for that purpose, and that it had thus been a consequence of their own conduct. In so far as it had found that the lack of an individualised procedure for their removal had been the consequence of the applicants’ own conduct, the Court could not hold the respondent State responsible for the lack of a legal remedy in Melilla enabling them to challenge that removal. 13 February 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): Effective remedy - Expulsion - Non-refoulement - Rejection at border | Countries: Côte d'Ivoire - Mali - Morocco - Spain |
Cartographie des personnes à risque d'apatridie en Côte d'Ivoire.
7 January 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country Profiles |