Last Updated: Wednesday, 17 May 2023, 11:42 GMT
Refworld Home
Latest Refworld Updates for Eritrea RSS feed

Eritrea - flag Eritrea

UNHCR is not responsible for the content and availability of non-UNHCR websites. Content displays in a new window.

Filter:
Showing 1-10 of 1,406 results
A.Y. v Switzerland

22 July 2022 | Judicial Body: UN Committee Against Torture (CAT) | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1984 Convention against Torture (CAT) | Topic(s): Country of origin information (COI) - Credibility assessment - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription | Countries: Eritrea - Switzerland

OVG Lüneburg 4. Senat, Beschluss vom 09.02.2022, 4 LA 74/20,

9 February 2022 | Judicial Body: Germany: Oberverwaltungsgericht | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Gender-based persecution - Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription - Social group persecution - Women-at-risk | Countries: Eritrea - Germany

Y (représenté par un conseil, Rêzan Zehrê) v. Suisse

28 January 2022 | Judicial Body: UN Committee Against Torture (CAT) | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1984 Convention against Torture (CAT) | Topic(s): Convention against Torture (CAT) - Deportation / Forcible return - Eritreans - Exhaustion of domestic remedies - Torture | Countries: Eritrea - Switzerland

Citizenship and Statelessness in the Horn of Africa

22 December 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports

Tewelde and Others v. Russia

Having regard to the information submitted by the parties, the Court finds that at first all the applicants were detained with a view to being removed, and their detention was presumably carried out initially in good faith and in compliance with Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention. However, the length of the applicants’ detention, as summarised in the relevant part of the Appendix, was from fourteen to sixteen months and the Government submitted no information about any actions taken in pursuit of the applicants’ administrative removal during these periods. Accordingly, in the Court’s view, the length of the applicants’ detention was not demonstrably related to the purpose pursued. 51. Furthermore, as regards the applicants’ complaint under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention concerning the lack of an effective procedure for review of detention, the Court notes that nothing in the available materials indicates that the applicants’ continued detention had been periodically reviewed or that they had indeed access to any procedure for such review. 52. Accordingly, the Court concludes that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 1 (f) and Article 5 § 4 of the Convention.

7 December 2021 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Eritreans - Immigration Detention | Countries: Eritrea - Russian Federation

R (on the application of BF (Eritrea)) (Respondent) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant) [2021] UKSC 38

The issues in the appeal are (1) whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in assessing the lawfulness of the policy guidance by reference to whether it (a) created a real risk of more than a minimal number of children being detained, and/or (b) created a risk which could be avoided if the terms of the policy were better formulated; and (2) whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that criterion C, as construed in the context of the relevant policy as a whole, is unlawful.

30 July 2021 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Supreme Court | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Asylum policy - Evidence (including age and language assessments / medico-legal reports) | Countries: Eritrea - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

X c. Suisse

Risque pour la vie et risque de torture ou de mauvais traitements en cas d’expulsion vers le pays d’origine

22 July 2021 | Judicial Body: UN Committee Against Torture (CAT) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Convention against Torture (CAT) - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment | Countries: Eritrea - Switzerland

Switzerland: Judgement FAC E-3822_2019 of 28 oct. 2020[1532]

The FAC has ruled that the SEM has to apply the principle of proportionality, which generally applies to revocation of residence permits, in cases where temporary admission is withdrawn. The FAC found that the temporary admission of the appellant, an Eritrea national, should be maintained.

28 October 2020 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Asylum-seekers - Residence permits / Residency | Countries: Eritrea - Switzerland

CASE OF NUR AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE (Application no. 77647/11)

The case mainly concerns the applicants’ complaints, under Article 5 of the Convention, that their arrest and detention as migrants in an irregular situation were unlawful, and that they were not informed of the reasons for their arrest and had no effective access to the procedure to challenge the lawfulness of their arrest and detention. It also concerns the eighth applicant’s complaint under Article 3 that she, a minor at the time, was not provided with adequate care in detention in connection with her pregnancy and the miscarriage she suffered.

16 July 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): Access to procedures - Arbitrary arrest and detention - Right to liberty and security | Countries: Eritrea - Guinea - Somalia - Ukraine

Esther Segai Gersagher et al. v. the Knesset et al.

The Court is requested to order the voidness of section 4 of the Prevention of Infiltration and Ensuring the Departure of Infiltrators from Israel 5775-2014 (Legislative Amendments and Temporary Provisions) 5775-2014 (hereinafter: the "Amending Law") that obliges foreign workers who entered Israel not through a border crossing (hereinafter: "Infiltrator Workers") and their employers to deposit in a special bank account a total amount at a rate of 36% of the worker's wages that will be paid to the worker only at the time of his departure from Israel (hereinafter: the "Deposit Scheme"). In short, the Petitioners argue that the Deposit Scheme, in general, or in the least some of its components, is unconstitutional and therefore should be voided.

23 April 2020 | Judicial Body: Israel: High Court of Justice | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Administrative law - Asylum-seekers - Constitutional law - Illegal entry - Non-refoulement | Countries: Eritrea - Israel - Sudan

Search Refworld

Advanced Search | Search Tips
UNHCR logo