International law / Human rights law

March 2022 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports

January 2022 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: General Comments/Recommendations

In view of the above, the Court notes that the risk of the applicant being expelled and, potentially, being exposed to a risk of treatment in breach of Article 3, has now, at least temporarily, been removed. Moreover, the Court finds that the complaints under Article 13 and on the procedural requirements of Article 3 in the present case are in essence inextricably connected to the proposed expulsion of the applicant (see Nasseri v the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 24239/09, § 18, 13 October 2015, and J.W. v. the Netherlands (dec.), no. 16177/14, § 32, 27 June 2017). In these circumstances, the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 (c)). Moreover, it is satisfied that respect for human rights, as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto, does not require a continuation of the application by virtue of Article 37 § 1 in fine. Accordingly, the application should be struck out of the list.

21 October 2021 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Human rights law - Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures | Countries: Afghanistan - Netherlands

The Committee considered that the State party failed to adequately assess the author’s real, personal and foreseeable risk of returning to Afghanistan, in particular taking into account his father’s alleged threats of revenge and his trauma as a result of parental abuse. Accordingly, the Committee considers that the State party failed to give due consideration to the consequences of the author’s personal situation in Afghanistan and concludes that his removal to Afghanistan by the State party would constitute a violation of articles 6 and 7 of the Covenant.

30 April 2021 | Judicial Body: UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Human rights law | Countries: Afghanistan - Sweden

January 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: General Comments/Recommendations

31 December 2020 | Publisher: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law Compilations/Analyses

31 August 2020 | Publisher: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law Compilations/Analyses

6 December 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae

3 September 2019 | Publisher: UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) | Document type: General Comments/Recommendations

21 May 2019 | Publisher: National Legislative Bodies / National Authorities | Document type: National Legislation