You are here
Home › Death penalty / Execution ›EDAL case summaries
Country of Decision: Greece
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Benefit of doubt, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Death penalty / Execution, Discrimination, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Internal protection, Real risk, Religion, Serious harm, Sexual orientation, Well-founded fear
The Applicant was a homosexual male from Iran who had renounced Islam and was studying the catechism of the Roman Catholic doctrine. It was held that the Applicant had no well-founded (objective) fear of persecution on the grounds of changing his religious beliefs.
Regarding the risks associated with his sexual orientation, the fear that the Applicant expressed was deemed to be well-founded, and it was held that not externalising his sexual orientation to avoid danger would, in and of itself, constitute serious harm to his right to respect for his private life and his...
Date: 22-06-2012
Country of Decision: Greece
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Credibility assessment, Death penalty / Execution, Discrimination, Duty of applicant, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Real risk, Refugee sur place, Religion, Serious harm, Torture, Well-founded fear
This case involved recognition of refugee status under Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Convention on grounds of religious beliefs.
More specifically, it was held that the arrest and torture the Applicant suffered at the hands of his father and the State authorities because of his Christian faith, the risk of being executed for apostasy because he was baptised in Greece, and the risk of being arrested and maltreated again should he return to Iran, constituted persecution under Article 1A(2) of the 1951 Convention, the actor of persecution being the State. Furthermore, being forced to...
Date: 20-06-2012
Country of Decision: Finland
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Death penalty / Execution, Membership of a particular social group, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Sexual orientation
Although the asylum seeker has been unable to offer any credible account of the death penalty allegedly imposed on him due to his homosexuality, it must nevertheless be assessed whether, he has grounds to fear persecution or is in real danger of suffering serious harm in his home country due to his sexual orientation, and what weight must be given to the fact that he must hide his homosexuality to avoid this kind of threat. The judgments of the Administrative Court and the Immigration Service were overturned and the case was returned to the Immigration Service for further consideration...
Date: 13-01-2012
Country of Decision: Greece
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Death penalty / Execution, Dependant (Dependent person), Discrimination, Family unity (right to), Gender Based Persecution, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Membership of a particular social group, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Protection, Real risk, Refugee Status, Torture, Well-founded fear
This was an appeal against the rejection of an application for asylum before the Appeal Committees formed pursuant to Articles 26 and 32 of Presidential Decree 114/2010; and against the Minister for Citizen Protection's decisions 5401/3-498356 dated 11.2.2011 and 4000/1/67-f dated 18.5.2011. The rejection of the application (and the legal consequences arising from the rejection) was an excusable error, due to the body issuing the decision having adopted misguided practices. The fear of persecution was based on membership of a particular social group. The domestic violence endured by the...
Date: 26-06-2011
Country of Decision: Czech Republic
Country of Applicant: Senegal
Keywords: Serious harm, Death penalty / Execution, Armed conflict, Internal protection
Internal protection has to be assessed in accordance with the Qualification Directive, and under very strict criteria. The possibility of relocating to another part of the country has to be available to the applicant and the protection has to be effective.
Date: 28-07-2009
Country of Applicant: Iraq
Keywords: Death penalty / Execution, Effective remedy (right to), Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Procedural guarantees, Real risk, Return, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), War crimes, Well-founded fear
This case concerned the decision of the Court as to the admissibility of the application of two Iraqi nationals who had been detained in Iraq by the British government as criminal detainees and then transferred by it to the Iraqi authorities. The Court held that the application was partly admissible.
Date: 30-06-2009
Country of Decision: Czech Republic
Country of Applicant: Ukraine
Keywords: Subsidiary Protection, Serious harm, Death penalty / Execution, Manifestly unfounded application, Non-refoulement
The Ministry of Interior is obliged to consider whether the conditions for granting subsidiary protection are fulfilled even when the application for international protection is dismissed as manifestly unfounded when it is clear that the applicant is making an application merely in order to delay or frustrate the enforcement of an earlier or imminent decision which would result in his or her removal, and if the applicant has failed without reasonable cause to make his or her application earlier, having had opportunity to do so.
Date: 11-02-2009
Country of Applicant: Turkey
Keywords: Death penalty / Execution, Detention, Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Exclusion from protection, Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid, Political Opinion, Terrorism, Well-founded fear
The applicant was the leader of the PKK and the most wanted person in Turkey. He was arrested and sentenced to the death penalty. Breaches of Articles 3, 5 and 6 were found with regard to his detention, the imposition of the death penalty and his rights as the defence to a fair trial.
Date: 12-03-2003
Country of Applicant: Germany
Keywords: Death penalty / Execution, Effective remedy (right to), Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid, Torture
The Court found that in the event of the United Kingdom Secretary of State’s decision to extradite a fugitive indicted of murder in the United States being implemented, there would be a violation of Article 3 due to the possibility of his conviction of a death sentence, and the treatment and punishment he would face on death row in Virginia.
Date: 07-07-1989
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Death penalty / Execution filterDeath penalty / Execution
- Well-founded fear 5
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 4
- Real risk 4
- Serious harm 4
- Discrimination 3
- Effective remedy (right to) 3
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 3
- Torture 3
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 2
- Credibility assessment 2
- Internal protection 2
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 2
- Membership of a particular social group 2
- Religion 2
- Sexual orientation 2
- Armed conflict 1
- Benefit of doubt 1
- Country of origin information 1
- Dependant (Dependent person) 1
- Detention 1
- Duty of applicant 1
- Effective access to procedures 1
- Exclusion from protection 1
- Family unity (right to) 1
- Gender Based Persecution 1
- Manifestly unfounded application 1
- Non-refoulement 1
- Political Opinion 1
- Procedural guarantees 1
- Protection 1
- Refugee Status 1
- Refugee sur place 1
- Return 1
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 1
- Subsidiary Protection 1
- Terrorism 1
- War crimes 1
Filter by country of decision
- Greece 3
- Czech Republic 2
- Finland 1
