The applicant, Mr. Abdi, is a Somali national who applied for asylum in the United Kingdom and is currently detained in a British prison. In 1998 he was sentenced to imprisonment. In 2003 his release became automatic, but he remained in detention as a result of a deportation order issued in 2002 and a subsequent authority for detention. In April 2004, the Home Department authorised his detention until deportation. However, deportation was not possible for the British authorities until July 2006. His detention during this period was declared lawful by British Courts. Mr.
The Commissioner, Nils Muižnieks, strongly condemns forced returns of children, detention of children, the use of X-ray tests to determine age, and recent proposals by the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom to set up a 'return house' called the 'Welcoming Centre' in Afghanistan to facilitate the return of children. While aimed at family reunification, the idea has been opposed due to risks of sexual and military trafficking, the high difficulty of family tracing in Afghanistan, and the risks of child disappearance and persecution.
The overview by Steve Peers provides information on the second-phase of the CEAS and the state-of-play with regards to its five main legislative measures.
It also mentions that some connected legislation has already been adopted: an amendment to the EU refugee fund regarding resettlement (adopted spring 2012); an extension to the EU’s legislation on long-term residents to cover refugees and persons with subsidiary protection (adopted spring 2011); and legislation establishing a European Asylum Support Office (adopted early 2010).
In the MM judgment (C-277/11, reported in the Weekly Legal Update issue of 23 November 2012), the CJEU ruled that, where a State chooses to establish two separate procedures for examining asylum applications and applications for subsidiary protection, an applicant who has applied for subsidiary protection after the rejection of his asylum claim must be granted a fresh hearing in this second
The applicant, Abdusami Rakhmonov, is an Uzbekistani national who was born in 1974 and has been living in Moscow since July 2010. In September 2010, a court in Uzbekistan ordered his arrest pending a criminal investigation against him. In February 2011, he was arrested in Moscow and placed in detention with a view to his extradition to Uzbekistan. In August 2011, the Russian Prosecutor General rejected the request for his extradition. An order for his administrative expulsion was quashed by the courts in September 2011.
On 10/07/2012, the European Asylum Support Office published its first country of origin information (COI) report. The report focuses on Taliban recruitment strategies in Afghanistan. It has also published a methodology guideline for future similar reports. Country of origin reports represent a crucial tool for the decision-making on asylum applications and their availability enhances harmonisation of asylum procedures in the EU.
The applicant is a Moroccan national who arrived illegally in France. He alleged that he had been tortured by the Moroccan secret services because of his support to the Sahrawi cause. He was placed in detention and, following an international arrest warrant from Morocco based on allegations of terrorism, he was imprisoned with a view to his extradition in 2009. The French authorities approved his extradition and the applicant's appeals were dismissed. In the meantime he had also applied for asylum, but his application was dismissed.
The Dutch Council of State has decided to refer a question for a preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning the assessment of the credibility of asylum claims based on persecution on grounds of sexual orientation:
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has adopted two reports with the corresponding resolutions and recommendations to the Committee of Ministers concerning migration and asylum issues.
In November 2012 the Irish Supreme Court referred a question for a preliminary ruling to the CJEU in the case Nawaz v Minister for Justice Equality & Law Reform and others, asking directly about the compatibility of the Irish system with Directive 2004/83/EC:
