Greece: ICJ and others intervene in case challenging returns under EU-Turkey deal

Greece: ICJ and others intervene in case challenging returns under EU-Turkey deal

The ICJ and other human rights organisations intervened before the European Court of Human Rights in a case challenging the returns of migrants and refugees from Greece under the EU-Turkey deal.

The ICJ, the AIRE Centre, the European Council on Refugees and Exiles and the Dutch Council for Refugees have submitted a third party intervention before the European Court of Human Rights in the case of J.B. v. Greece. The case concerns the decision of Greek authorities to return a Syrian refugee to Turkey under the legal assumption that Turkey is a safe third country for refugees, that has been introduced following the EU-Turkey deal reached in reaction to the “refugee crisis”.

The interveners challenge the implementation of the rule of safe third country in these situations with regard to Greece’s obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Specifically, the intervention focuses on:

  • The principle of non-refoulement under the ECHR;
  • The safe third country concept in international refugee law and EU law;
  • The respect of the right to an effective remedy in cases of returns to Turkey under the safe third country rule.

Greece-JB_v_Greece-ECtHR-amicus-ICJ&others-final-eng-2017 (download the intervention)

Intervention by the AIRE Centre, ICJ, ILGA-EUROPE and ECRE in case O.S. v. Switzerland (no. 43987/16)

Intervention by the AIRE Centre, ICJ, ILGA-EUROPE and ECRE in case O.S. v. Switzerland (no. 43987/16)

The AIRE Centre, ICJ, ILGA-EUROPE and ECRE have submitted a third party intervention in case O.S. v. Switzerland (no. 43987/16).

This intervention addresses the following points:

i) enforced concealment of one’s same-sex sexual orientation constitutes persecution under refugee law and is incompatible with the Convention, in particular, Article 3

ii) the criminalisation of consensual same-sex sexual conduct gives rise to a real risk of Article 3 prohibited treatment, thus triggering non-refoulement obligations under the Convention

iii) the risk of persecution based on sexual orientation in Gambia.

Universal-SexualOrientationRefugee-Advocacy-LegalSubmissions-2017-ENG (full legal submission)

 

ICJ intervenes in case of migrant’s detention and access to justice in Italy

ICJ intervenes in case of migrant’s detention and access to justice in Italy

The ICJ submitted today a third party intervention before the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Richmond Yaw and others v. Italy regarding the detention of four migrants in Italian Centres for Identification and Expulsion.

The case raises issues related to the lawfulness of their detention in immigration centres, and the compliance of the mechanisms of judicial review and compensation for unlawful detention with the European Convention on Human Rights.

Taky Berko Richmond Yaw, Yaw Ansu Matthew, Darke Isaac Kwadwo, and Dominic Twumasi, nationals of Guinea, had been detained in the Centre for Identification and Expulsion of Ponte Galeria (Rome).

In these submissions, the ICJ presented the Court with a summary of its findings regarding the law and practice of detention of migrants and the related judicial guarantees in Italy, in its 2014 report, “Undocumented” Justice for Migrants in Italy.

Furthermore, the ICJ presented an analysis of the principles that apply in regard to arbitrary detention of persons detained for the purposes of immigration control under article 5.1.f. ECHR, in particular:

  • The principle of legality, including the fact that the basis, procedures and conditions for detention must be provided by law, and the principle that detention must be carried out in good faith; and the due process guarantees related to these principles;
  • The requirement that detention be undertaken only pursuant to the permitted purposes of article 5.1.f ECHR, and the need for strict construction of this requirement, and ongoing scrutiny of compliance with it, in particular in the context of long periods of detention;
  • The requirements of access to an effective judicial mechanism to secure the right to habeas corpus and review of the legality, necessity and proportionality of the detention of migrants, under article 5.4. ECHR;
  • The requirements of an effective remedy and reparation mechanism for unlawful deprivation of liberty under article 5.5 ECHR.

ECtHR-AmicusBrief-Yaw&others v Italy-Advocacy-Legal Submission-2015-ENG (download the third party intervention)

Submission on scope of future treaty on business and human rights

Submission on scope of future treaty on business and human rights

This paper was prepared by the ICJ for the first session of the Open Ended Intergovernmental working Group on a Legally Binding Instrument on TNCs and other business enterprises, argues that all conduct by all types of business enterprises, whether local or transnational, should be addressed in the legally binding instrument.

The paper argues that business enterprises that do not have any or any significant transnational operations no doubt are capable of and in many instances have been responsible for human rights abuses no less serious in scale or severity than those of transnational businesses. The victims of human rights abuses committed directly or indirectly by businesses are unlikely to distinguish whether the business enterprise that causes them harm has transnational ownership or operations; nor are victims likely to excuse abuses they suffer from a “local” business simply because the entity lacks a transnational element.
Therefore, in principle all conduct by all types of business enterprises, whether local or transnational, shall be addressed in the legally Binding instrument. The footnote in the preamble should not be interpreted as limiting in any way the scope of possible discussions in the Intergovernmental Working Group or any analysis or recommendations that may be reported back to the Council on a future treaty.

Global-Report-ScopeBusinessTreaty-2015

Translate »