UNHCR is not responsible for the content and availability of non-UNHCR websites. Content displays in a new window.
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL RICHARD DE LA TOUR in Case C‑621/21 (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad (Administrative Court, Sofia, Bulgaria))
20 April 2023 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Legal Instrument: 2011 Recast Qualification Directive (EU) | Topic(s): Domestic violence - Forced marriage - Non-state agents of persecution - Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) - Social group persecution - Women-at-risk | Countries: Bulgaria - Türkiye |
CASE OF SHENTURK AND OTHERS v. AZERBAIJAN (Applications nos. 41326/17 and other applications
– see appended list)
10 March 2022 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Expulsion - Extradition - Non-refoulement | Countries: Azerbaijan - Türkiye |
Arrêt No. 253 776 du 30 Avril 2021 dans l'affaire 253 551 / X
5 May 2021 | Judicial Body: Belgium: Conseil du Contentieux des Etrangers | Topic(s): Domestic violence | Countries: Belgium - Türkiye |
AFFAIRE E.K. c. GRÈCE
Although the applicant, who had entered Greece illegally, had benefited from satisfactory conditions of detention, the review of the lawfulness of his detention had been inadequate 15 January 2021 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment | Countries: Greece - Türkiye |
CASE OF ILIAS AND AHMED v. HUNGARY (Application no. 47287/15) (Grand Chamber)
The Court found in particular that the Hungarian authorities had failed in their duty under Article 3 to assess the risks of the applicants not having proper access to asylum proceedings in Serbia or being subjected to chain-refoulement, which could have seen them being sent to Greece, where conditions in refugee camps had already been found to be in violation of Article 3. In a development of its case-law, it held that Article 5 was not applicable to the applicants’ case as there had been no de facto deprivation of liberty in the transit zone. Among other things, the Court found that the applicants had entered the transit zone of their own initiative and it had been possible in practice for them to return to Serbia, where they had not faced any danger to their life or health. Their fears of a lack of access to Serbia’s asylum system or of refoulement to Greece, as expressed under Article 3, had not been enough to make their stay in the transit zone involuntary. 21 November 2019 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Expulsion - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Rejection at border - Right to liberty and security - Safe third country - Transit | Countries: Bangladesh - Greece - Hungary - North Macedonia - Serbia - Türkiye |
BP (Turkey)
30 October 2019 | Judicial Body: New Zealand: Immigration and Protection Tribunal | Topic(s): Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription | Countries: New Zealand - Türkiye |
CASE OF G.B. AND OTHERS v. TURKEY (Application no. 4633/15)
The Court further notes that the move in international law towards adopting alternative measures to the administrative detention of migrants appears to concern not only children, but also their parents. violation of the applicants’ rights under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention on account of the failure of both the Istanbul Magistrates’ Court and the Constitutional Court to conduct a review of the lawfulness of their detention in an effective and speedy manner. The Court notes, once again, that the review mechanism set out under Law no. 6458 appears to be wholly ineffective in a case, such as the present one, where the detention of a minor in the immigration context is not based on an administrative decision. 17 October 2019 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Effective remedy - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Prison or detention conditions - Right to liberty and security | Countries: Russian Federation - Türkiye |
State Secretary for Ministry and Justice v. X
general situation of Gulen movement and whether this groups runs a real risk of treatment in violation of article 3 ECHR 13 February 2019 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: Council of State (Raad van State) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Coup d'état | Countries: Netherlands - Türkiye |
KHO:2019:23
12 February 2019 | Judicial Body: Finland: Supreme Administrative Court | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription | Countries: Finland - Türkiye |
Decisions 20802/25.9.2018 and 20898/26.9.2018 of the 9th Independent Appeals Committee (administrative body, second instance)
25 September 2018 | Judicial Body: Greece: Administrative Court (First Instance) of Athens | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Foreign occupation - Safe third country | Countries: Greece - Syrian Arab Republic - Türkiye |