The applicants are Iraqi nationals whose asylum claims were rejected by Sweden and who face deportation. Before the European Court of Human Rights, two of the applicants alleged that they would be at risk of being the victims of an honour-related crime due to their relationships with women that were disapproved of by their families. In the other six cases, the applicants alleged they would be at risk of persecution due to being Christians, which constitute a religious minority in the country.
Statewatch has published an analysis of the Commission's proposal for new rules for Frontex sea operations signed by Marie Martin. The analysis concludes that the proposal does not clarify Frontex's responsibility for and in joint operations and warns that it may contain provisions contrary to the principle of non-refoulement, given that in case of interception on the high seas, disembarkation may take place in the third country from which the ship departed.
The applicant is an Ethiopian national who claimed asylum in Sweden in 2007 on the ground that he had been beaten, imprisoned and tortured after criticising the 2005 elections in his country. His asylum claim was rejected by the authorities who found that he had failed to prove any future risk of ill-treatment if he were sent back to Ethiopia. The applicant argued that his removal to Ethiopia would put him at risk of death or treatment contrary to Article 3.
UNHCR recommends that Dublin participating States refrain from transferring asylum seekers under the Dublin Regulation to Hungary, in cases where those asylum seekers have or may have been in Serbia prior to entering Hungary. In a note published this week, UNHCR highlights that Hungary considers Serbia to be a ‘safe third country’, and systematically returns asylum seekers who have transited through Serbia to that country without examination of their claims on the merits.
A new report by the Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM) outlines ways for advocates to engage with legal systems on national and international levels. Drawing on discussions among representatives from key monitoring bodies, legal experts, and service providers at PICUM’s Annual Workshop, the report is a guide for practitioners that can be used to enforce the fundamental rights of undocumented migrants through mechanisms at the national level and in the EU, the Council of Europe, and the UN.
Next Tuesday, the CJEU will be holding a hearing concerning the case of Abdullahi, a preliminary reference lodged by the Austrian Asylum Court (Asylgerichtshof) in August 2012 concerning the Dublin Regulation. The questions referred are the following:
(Area of freedom, security and justice - Directive 2008/115/EC - Common standards and procedures for returning illegally staying third-country nationals - legal consequences of failing to respect the rights of the defence in a decision extending detention for the purpose of removal - does not automatically lift the detention)
UNHCR has acknowledged in its December update note that Hungary does no longer deny in-merit examination of asylum claims where the applicants have previously transited through Serbia or Ukraine, and consequently has amended its previous position from October 2012 where it urged Member States to stop sending back to Hungary applicants who had transited Serbia. According to UNHCR, those applicants have ceased to be detained or returned to Serbia or Ukraine.
The British High Court decided this week that a group of Tamils the UK Border Agency intended to deport back to Sri Lanka should stay in the United Kingdom until an upcoming Country Guidance case concerning the safety of returned failed asylum seekers in Sri Lanka is decided. As the High Court considered that the guidance on Sri Lanka was being considered virtually afresh and that the existing country guidance will have to change, the suspension on the removal of all Tamil failed asylum seekers was ordered.
