CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 27 avril 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both }         Communicated on 27 April 2016     THIRD SECTION Application no. 62222/15 S.B. and Others against Sweden lodged on 17 December 2015 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicants are a family of Afghan nationals. Following their application for asylum in Sweden, a search in the European asylum fingerprint database EURODAC revealed that they had travelled through Greece and Hungary and had applied for asylum in the latter country. Accordingly, their transfer to Hungary was ordered under the Dublin III Regulation. The Swedish Migration Board ( Migrationsverket ) and the Migration Court ( Migrationsdomstolen ) did not find that there were systemic flaws in the asylum procedure and reception conditions in Hungary or that the applicants’ statements, including that the applicant mother was due to give birth, gave reason to ignore the Regulation’s provisions on transfer. COMPLAINT The applicants complain under Article 3 of the Convention that their transfer to Hungary would subject them to the risk of ill-treatment in Hungary because of alleged systemic flaws in that country’s asylum procedure and reception conditions as well as the risk of further removal from there to an unsafe third country, including a chain refoulement to Afghanistan.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     In the light of the applicants’ claims and the documents which have been submitted, would they face a risk of being subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention if the decision to transfer them to Hungary were enforced? 2.     In particular, bearing in mind that two of the applicants are small children and that a third child was expected in February 2016, will the Swedish authorities, before such an enforcement, obtain individual guarantees from the Hungarian authorities that the applicants will be taken charge of in a manner adapted to the age of the children and that the family will be kept together (cf. Tarakhel v. Switzerland [GC], no. 29217/12, ECHR 2014 (extracts)? 3.     Furthermore, the parties are invited to provide any information concerning the conditions of reception facing the applicants and other asylum seekers transferred to Hungary in accordance with the Dublin III Regulation.