Journal

The ECtHR Ruling in Ilias and Ahmed: ‘safe third country’ concept put to the test

Date: 
Thursday, April 13, 2017

On 14 March 2017 the Fourth Section of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) delivered its judgement in the case of Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary concerning two asylum seekers of Bangladeshi nationality who were detained at the border zone in Hungary and then subject to removal to Serbia. Although the judgement is not final yet (as Hungary could...

The Emergence of the Entry Human Rights Principle. Looking Beyond the X.X. Case

Date: 
Thursday, April 6, 2017

1. Introduction 

On 7 March, the CJEU in the X.X. case decided that Member States were not obliged under Article 25(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 (CCV) to issue a short-term visa for humanitarian purposes as the applicants planned to stay for...

Looking like a cat, walking like a cat, sounding like a cat but actually being a dog: What the X and X judgment means for the scope of the EU Charter?

Date: 
Wednesday, April 5, 2017

An easy way out: the Court’s judgment in X and X

Saying that the X and X judgment was awaited with bated breath is an understatement. The referral of X and X’s case gave a window of opportunity to the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘CJEU’) to rule on whether EU law obliges States to provide a limited territorial visa (‘LTV’) on humanitarian grounds for those who risk treatment contrary to the...

The detention of asylum seeking children in Hungary: Dire tendencies in upholding the basic rights of children

Date: 
Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Since 2015, the term ‘refugee crisis’ has been widely used to describe the phenomenon of a relatively large number of people seeking protection in the EU. When observing the worrying human rights violations and the detention of asylum seekers, especially children in Hungary, one might ask, however: is it not the rule of law which is in crisis?

This blog will examine the legal framework of the detention of asylum seeking children and the procedural flaws the Hungarian asylum system is struggling with. It will discuss whether the current system is in line with the relevant...

What more can be done? – lost hope in improving judicial review of asylum detention in Hungary

Date: 
Wednesday, March 1, 2017

Introduction

In Hungary judicial review of the administrative decision imposing detention on an asylum seeker is conducted by first instance local criminal courts. First the court performs the review within 72h after detention was ordered by the Immigration and Asylum Office (IAO). The court undertakes further reviews every 60 days. The court hearing is mandatory only at the first judicial review. Asylum seekers have a right to an ex officio appointed lawyer. Today, more asylum seekers are held in asylum detention than in open reception centres (a practice which was...

Strategic Litigation as a tool to help the Afghan 1F’ers in the Netherlands

Date: 
Thursday, February 16, 2017

Introduction

One of the strategic litigation cases of the Dutch Public Interest Litigation Project (PILP), a project of the Dutch section of the International Commission of Jurists (NJCM), is about the so-called Afghan 1F’s. This blog aims to highlight the problem of the ‘Afghan 1F’ers’ in the Netherlands and it aims to demonstrate the way in which PILP has built litigation against the state.

Afghan refugees in legal limbo

Article 1F of the...

Is strategic litigation a way of ensuring that the rights of unaccompanied minors are fully considered in law, policy and practice?

Date: 
Wednesday, February 15, 2017

Introduction

According to Hannah Arendt civil disobedience is a non-violent opinion, openly expressed in public and directed at doubtful laws and policies imposed by governments. Strategic litigation could be considered as a form of civil disobedience which seeks to achieve changes in policies and raise public awareness to promote and ensure human rights. This type of litigation has developed from what some...

Strategic Litigation at a European Level

Date: 
Tuesday, February 14, 2017

What is strategic litigation and why is it important?

Strategic litigation is an important aspect of refugee protection and, indeed, for human rights protection generally, whereby cases are taken with a specific aim of benefitting as many people as possible by bringing about a change in the law and/or its implementation in practice. Of course, even using the term ‘strategy’ gives the impression that there is a set list of criteria that a case can meet to become strategic and while it may be true that there are criteria that can attach to a case that will, if...

The ZAT case and the far-reaching consequences for the Dublin Regulation

Date: 
Thursday, February 9, 2017

1.  Introduction

The ZAT case was a judicial review before the UK Upper Tribunal. The outcome of the first instance judicial review suggested that the operation of the Dublin Regulation was inadequate to provide the necessary protection the applicants needed...

Exclusion from International Protection for Terrorist Activities under EU Law: from B & D to Lounani

Date: 
Friday, February 3, 2017

Introduction

In this article, I will discuss the evolving interpretation of the exclusion clauses at EU law over the course of time between the judgments of the Court of Justice in Joined Cases C-57/09 and C-101/09, Bundesrepublik Deutschland v. B & D, 9 November 2010 and that in Case C-573/14,...

Pages