European Court of Human Rights communicates asylum-related cases regarding Romania, Croatia and the Netherlands
These summaries were originally published by Elena, and are reprinted here with permission.
D and Others v. Romania (application no. 75953/16)
The case concerns an Iraqi national who was granted refugee status in Germany and who has lived in Romania since 1994. He was convicted of terrorist-related offences based on classified information by the Romanian Intelligence Service. The complaint is submitted by the person concerned, his former wife and their three children. They complain that the main applicant's removal to Iraq would violate his rights under Articles 2 and 3 ECHR as he would face a real risk of being sentenced to death or being subjected to torture or inhuman treatment on account of his conviction of terrorist-related activities in Romania. The applicants complain that the deportation to Iraq would separate the family and infringe their right to family life under Article 8 ECHR. They also bring complaints under Article 13 read in conjunction with Articles 2 and 3 ECHR due to a lack of an effective remedy, and under Article 6 ECHR, inter alia, on the grounds that the main applicant and his lawyer had no access to the confidential information and to other evidence presented in the criminal proceedings.
M.H. and others v. Croatia (application no. 15670/18)
The application concerns an Afghan family who is currently detained at the Tovarnik centre in Croatia. In 2017, they entered Croatia from Serbia and were stopped by the Croatian police and summarily returned to Serbia. One of the children was hit by a train and died while the family was being “pushed back”. In March 2018 the family succeeded to enter Croatia and submitted asylum applications, which were rejected on the basis that Serbia could be considered a safe third country. The applicants complain under:
Article 3 ECHR in that the detention centre does not comply with the requirements under that article, in particular having regard to the fact that they are a family with eleven minor children;
Article 5(1)(f) ECHR in that their detention lacks any legal basis and is disproportionate to any legitimate aim;
Article 8 ECHR that their detention hinders their private and family life;
Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 regarding their repeated summary removals from Croatia to Serbia;
Article 14 ECHR in conjunction with the aforementioned articles in that they had been discriminated against due to their status as asylum seekers; and
Article 34 ECHR due to the failure of the Croatian authorities to comply with the interim measures issued by the ECtHR and due to the alleged attempt by national authorities to hinder the lawyer’s access and contact with the applicants.
Cüzdan v. the Netherlands (applications nos. 6315/08 and 9597/12)
The applications concern a Turkish national who has been living in the Netherlands with his father since he was eight years old. His applications for residence permit were rejected as he did not hold a provisional residence visa, which had to be applied for in the country of origin. The applicant complains that the refusal to allow him to reside in the Netherlands with his father contravenes his rights under Article 8 ECHR. Moreover, he complains under Article 13 ECHR read in conjunction with Article 8 ECHR that the refusal of the national administration to take account of the documentary evidence which substantiated his submissions (such as his father’s depression diagnosis and his integration in the society) had rendered his further appeal ineffective.
