1 / 19

Seminar on detention of asylum-seekers and alternatives to detention

This seminar discusses the UNHCR position and relevant case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the detention of asylum-seekers, as well as alternatives to detention. It covers the UNHCR mandate, terminology, EU law, and the rights of refugees and asylum-seekers. The seminar also highlights the necessity test and offers insights into the compatibility of detention measures with the European Convention on Human Rights.

judyclark
Télécharger la présentation

Seminar on detention of asylum-seekers and alternatives to detention

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Seminar on detention of asylum-seekersand alternatives to detention UNHCR Position and Relevant case-law of the European Court of Human Rights UNHCR Representation to the European institutions in Strasbourg

  2. Detention / Alternatives to detention I. Mandate/Terminology II. UNHCR Position on detention of refugees III. Relevant ECHR case-law IV. EU law

  3. UNHCR Mandate • Refugees / Asylum-seekers = 10 400 000 / 990 000 • Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) = 15 630 000 • Stateless persons = 6 560 000 Mandate / Terminology

  4. 1951 Refugee Convention / Article 31 * * * • The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of article I, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence. 2. The Contracting States shall not apply to the movements of such refugees restrictions other than those which are necessary and such restrictions shall only be applied until their status in the country is regularized or they obtain admission into another country. The contracting States shall allow such refugees a reasonable period and all the necessary facilities to obtain admission into another country. UNHCR Position on detention of refugees

  5. Executive Committee Conclusions No. 4413 October 1986 * * * The ExCom (…) (b) Expressed the opinion that in view of the hardship which it involves, detention should normally be avoided. If necessary, detention may be resorted to only on grounds prescribed by law 1. to verify identity 2. to determine the elements on which the claim to refugee status or asylum is based 3. to deal with cases where refugees or asylum-seekers have destroyed their travel and/or identity documents or have used fraudulent documents in order to mislead the authorities of the State in which they intend to claim asylum or 4. to protect national security or public order (…) UNHCR Position on detention of refugees

  6. February 1999 / UNHCR Revised Guidelines on applicable criteria and standards relating to the detention of asylum-seekers* * * Guideline 2: Asylum-seekers should not be detained Guideline 3:Exceptional Grounds for Detention 1. cases in which identity is undetermined or in dispute 2. Preliminary interview 3. cases where there is an intention to mislead the authorities 4. cases where there is evidence to show that the asylum- seeker has criminal antecedents and/or affiliations likely to pose a risk to public order/national security Guideline 4: Alternatives to Detention UNHCR Position on detention of refugees

  7. February 1999 / UNHCR Revised Guidelines on applicable criteria and standards relating to the detention of asylum-seekers* * * Guideline 5 – Procedural safeguards Guideline 6 – Children Guideline 7 – Vulnerable Persons Guideline 8 – Women Guideline 9 – Stateless persons Guideline 10 – Conditions of detention UNHCR Position on detention of refugees

  8. Necessity test / Is detention necessary?* * * Holistic test, taking into account: - Lack of empirical evidence that detention deters irregular migration or discourages persons from seeking asylum - Human rights consequences are important - Social and economic costs are important - Seeking asylum is not a criminal act Detention = a measure of last resort UNHCR Position on detention of refugees

  9. Alternatives to detention* * * - 90% compliance or cooperation rates can be achieved when persons are released to proper supervision and facilities • There are alternatives to detention ≠alternative forms of detention • Examples (Open reception centre, registration, group based organisation, guarantees, reporting, case management etc.) UNHCR Position on detention of refugees

  10. Article 5 ECHR* * * Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law: (...) f) the lawful arrest or detention of a person to prevent his effecting an unauthorised entry into the country or [first limb] of a person against whom action is being taken with a view to deportation or extradition. [second limb] Relevant ECHR case-law

  11. Deprivation of liberty* * * If deprivation of liberty = Article 5 applies - Airport transit zones Amuur v. France Shamsa v. Poland - Reception centres Merie v. The Netherlands • UNHCR Mandate / Detention pending deportation (failed asylum-seekers) Relevant ECHR case-law

  12. Compatibility of the measure with Article 5 ECHR* * * Lawfulness review… Nolan and K. v. Russia …involves an arbitrariness review Saadi v. The United Kingdom Relevant ECHR case-law

  13. Arbitrariness criteria ≠ Necessity test?* * * • Carried out in good faith Rusu v. Austria • Closely connected to the purpose of preventing unauthorized entry Gebremedhin v. France Auad v. Bulgaria Relevant ECHR case-law

  14. Arbitrariness criteria ≠ Necessity test?* * * • Conditions of detention should be appropriate S.D. v. Greece Tabesh v. Greece Abdolkhani and Karimnia v. Turkey • Length of detention should not exceed that reasonably required for the purpose pursued ≠ Necessity test? Relevant ECHR case-law

  15. Alternatives to detention = Necessity test?* * * Direct references in the recent Court’s case-law Mikolenko v. Estonia Raza v. Bulgaria Auad v. Bulgaria Detention of unaccompanied children = last resort measure Rahimi v. Greece Relevant ECHR case-law

  16. Asylum Procedures Directive 2005/85/EC* * * Article 18 – prohibition against detention of an asylum-seeker + speedy judicial review Article 16(2) –legal advisor or counsellor has access to closed areas, such as detention facilities & transit zones Article 21(1) –UNHCR allowed to access to asylum-seekers, including those in detention & in airport or port transit zones EU acquis

  17. Reception Conditions Directive 2003/9/EC* * * Art 2(k) – defines detention as “confinement of an asylum seeker by a MS within a particular place, where asylum seeker in deprived of his/her freedom of movement. Recital 10 & 13 – reception of asylum applicants in detention should be specifically designed to meet their needs

  18. Returns Directive 2008/115/EC* * * - for asylum-seekers whose claim has been rejected - codifies some well-established principles of international law against arbitrary detention (Art 15-18) EU acquis

  19. CJEU jurisprudence* * * Interpretation of the Returns Directive: • Kadzoev v. Bulgaria C-357/09 (30/11/2009) • El Dridi , C-61/11 (28/04/2011) EU acquis

More Related