The CRC Committee found that the children’s detention in closed family detention centres violated the prohibition on ill-treatment (art. 37 CRC), read alone and in conjunction with the best-interests principle (art. 3 CRC).
Source:
Languages Archives: French
Sabani v. Belgium, Application No. 53069/15, Judgment of 8 March 2022
On 10/03/2023 in
In this case, the Court decided that the use of handcuffs on a mother in front of her daughter is an aggravating factor.
Source: click here
Darboe and Camara v. Italy, Application No. 5797/17, Judgment of 21 July 2022
On 10/03/2023 in
This case concerns 2 unaccompanied minor migrants interned in an overcrowded reception centre for adult migrants for 4 months. This constitutes a violation of Articles 3, 8 and 13 of the ECHR.
Source: click here.
Affaire Mohamad v. Greece, Application No. 70586/11, Judgment of 11 December 2014
On 10/03/2023 in
This case concerns the detention for 5 months of an Iraqi minor at a border post in Sufli in unacceptable conditions and without taking into consideration his condition as a minor. This constitutes a violation of Article 3 ECHR coupled with Article 13 ECHR and a violation of Article 5 ECHR.
Source: click here
Muskhadzhiyeva and Others v. Belgium, Application No. 41442/07, Judgment of 19 January 2010
On 10/03/2023 in
This case concerns the detention of a mother and her four children (aged 7 months, three and a half years, five and seven years at the time of the events) for more than a month in a closed transit centre whose infrastructure was unsuitable for the reception of children. The Court found that this constitutes a violation of Article 3 for all the applicants and a violation of Article 5 para. 1 in respect of the four child applicants, while no violation of Article 5 para. 4 was found for any of the applicants.
Source: click here.
Communications No. 55/2018 E.B on behalf of E.H. et al. v. Belgium, 24 March 2022
On 20/12/2022 in
The CRC Committee found that the children’s detention in closed family detention centres violated the prohibition on ill-treatment (art. 37 CRC), read alone and in conjunction with the best-interests principle (art. 3 CRC). Belgium’s failure to consider alternatives to detention, including the option of allowing the families to remain in their own homes while they pursued appeals and other judicial remedies, was an element of the finding that Belgium had not taken the children’s best interests as a primary consideration.
Source of the standard: