New communicated cases against Hungary, Greece, and Malta

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has recently communicated the following asylum-related cases:

• Ahmadzai v Hungary (Application No. 66069/16): The applicant is an Afghan refugee residing in Hungary. On 24 September 2012, at the time of the pending asylum procedure, an incident occurred between the applicant, a police officer, and guard at the Nyírbátor Detention Centre, which allegedly amounted to ill-treatment. According to the applicant, the investigation into the incident was ineffective. He complains that his treatment during the incident in question and the ineffective procedures guaranteeing protection from inhuman and degrading treatment constitute a violation under Article 3 of the Convention.
• Ayad and Others v Hungary (Application No. 7077/15): The applicants are Algerian, Afghan, and Iranian nationals who were detained while awaiting the assessment of their respective asylum claims. They complain under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention that their detention was unlawful, unjustified and arbitrary. They also complain that there existed no effective remedy to challenge the lawfulness of their detention as required by Article 5 § 4.
• Al Beid and Others v Greece (Application No. 36423/16): The 20 applicants are Syrian nationals. They complain that the living conditions in the EKO camp are incompatible with Article 3 of the Convention. The applicants also complain that the lack of access to effective asylum procedures is contrary to Article 3 in conjunction with Article 13 of the Convention as there is a substantial risk of expulsion to Syria without an examination of their asylum claims.
• Feilazoo v Malta (Application No. 6865/19): The applicant is a Nigerian national who was detained at Corradino Correctional Facility in Malta. Following a conviction in February 2010 the applicant was released on 10 April 2018. Upon release, he requested a return to Spain, where he had previously had a residence permit. This request was refused, and he was informed he would instead be deported to Nigeria. The applicant was informed that he would be detained whilst this process took place, and was not informed of his right to appeal this decision. The applicant refused to be detained again, and was restrained by police in order to force his detention. Both the applicant and the police suffered injuries during this incident. The applicant was informed that he would be charged, despite no lawyer being present. He was also invited to speak to an immigration lawyer to claim asylum. No application was made. The applicant was found guilty and given a 2 year sentence with an order to be deported upon his release. The applicant complains of the excessive use of force under Article 2 of the Convention. He also complains that his immigration detention was unlawful and contrary to Article 5 § 1 of the Convention, and authorities had done everything possible to hinder his application to the Court, including preventing him from gaining access to legal assistance.
   

This item was reproduced with the permission of ECRE from the ELENA Weekly Legal Update. The purpose of these updates is to inform asylum lawyers and legal organizations supporting asylum seekers and refugees of recent developments in the field of asylum law. Please note that the information provided is taken from publicly available information on the internet. Every reasonable effort is made to make the content accurate and up to date at the time each item is pusexblished but no responsibility for its accuracy and correctness, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed by ECRE.