CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 16 janvier 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; 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 } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sEA788D2 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .sE330DFD7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:17pt; margin-bottom:3pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s65E06E64 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s2FDFA002 { width:93.14%; border-collapse:collapse } .s691540AC { width:8.1%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE94478A1 { width:23.58%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s218DAFC1 { width:21.26%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sD49DF47A { width:22.16%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sB6704312 { width:24.9%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s855B731C { width:8.1%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6523867D { width:23.58%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s62EB4AA { width:21.26%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF2CEACBC { width:22.16%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sA64F712B { width:24.9%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Communicated on 24 October 2019 and 16 January 2020   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 48125/19 F.O. and Others against Italy and the Netherlands lodged on 13 September 2019 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns a Nigerian married couple who met in Italy and their baby who was born in July 2019 in the Netherlands. The applicants’ asylum applications were not taken up for consideration by the Netherlands authorities as it was found that the Italian authorities were responsible for the processing of those applications pursuant to the Dublin Regulation. It was held that the entry into force of the new Italian Law No. 132/2018 – the so-called “Salvini Decree” – did not lead to the conclusion that the asylum proceedings and reception conditions in Italy were affected by such systemic shortcomings that reliance could no longer be placed on the principle of mutual interstate trust ( interstatelijk vertrouwensbeginsel ). In her interviews with the Netherlands authorities, the woman had indicated that she had been granted a residence permit in Italy but that she had lost it during her journey to the Netherlands. Her husband had indicated that his asylum application had been rejected in Italy.   On 14 December 2018 the Netherlands authorities requested their Italian counterparts to accept the husband’s return to Italy under Article   18 §   1   (d) of the Dublin Regulation. As the Italian authorities failed to react to that request within two weeks, they were considered to have implicitly acceded to it by 29 December 2018.   On 24 December 2018 the Netherlands authorities requested their Italian counterparts to accept the woman’s return to Italy under Article   18 §   1   (b) of the Dublin Regulation. On 22 January 2019 the Italian authorities accepted this request.   After the applicants had unsuccessfully challenged the Netherlands authorities’ decision in administrative appeal proceedings, the Netherlands authorities planned to return the applicants to Italy under the Dublin Regulation.   The applicants complain that their return to Italy under the Dublin Regulation, without individual guarantees from the Italian authorities that they will be provided with adequate reception facilities suited to shelter a family with a baby, will breach Article 3 of the Convention.   On the basis of information provided by the Italian Government on 9   December 2019, it became clear that, unlike the husband who was considered to be an asylum seeker in Italy, the woman had been granted a residence permit in Italy for “special protection”. QUESTIONS TO THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT One of the applicants (the female applicant) has been granted a residence permit “for special protection”. What does “special protection” entail and what rights do holders of a humanitarian/special protection residence permit have? In the determination of her application for international protection in Italy, has it been examined whether or not she qualified for refugee status under the terms of the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or for subsidiary protection within the meaning of Article   15c of Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004, on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted? If so, what was the outcome? Are there differences in rights between beneficiaries of international protection within the meaning of Article 2 (b) of Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 (on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted) and persons holding a humanitarian/special protection residence permit? And if so what are those differences as regards entitlement to housing, education, health care, social insurances and access to the labour market? According to the Circular Letter of 27 December 2018 by the Minister of Interior, beneficiaries of international protection can stay in a SIPROIMI facility for 6 months after they have been granted protection. Does this also apply to persons having been granted a humanitarian/special protection residence permit? What happens when those 6 months have ended? Your Government are requested to submit a copy of the residence permit held by the female applicant. When will her current residence permit expire and under what conditions will her “special protection” permit be renewed? The application for international protection of the other applicant (the male applicant) has apparently – as indicated by him when he was interviewed by the Dutch authorities – been rejected by the Italian authorities. Is this correct? If so, when has that decision been taken and has the applicant appealed that decision? In the light of the applicants’ claims, would they face a risk of being subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention if returned to Italy? QUESTIONS TO THE NETHERLANDS GOVERNMENT In view of the information submitted by the Italian Government on 9   December 2019 on the legal status of the applicants, under which legal framework will the applicants be returned to Italy? In the light of the applicants’ claims, would they face a risk of being subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention if returned to Italy?   APPENDIX No. Applicant’s Name Birth date Nationality Place of residence 1. F.O. 15/06/1994 Nigerian Harderwijk 2. E.S. 14/07/2019 Nigerian Harderwijk 3. P.S. 26/10/1995 Nigerian Harderwijk