CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 septembre 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sD37F5C3B { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .s5FE220B3 { width:67.38%; margin-left:49.4pt; border-collapse:collapse } .s9D0A437D { width:19.5%; 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 } .sF0DFD7D6 { width:39.86%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sD2F5E878 { width:40.64%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDA7BF4DB { width:19.5%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF05D1D98 { width:39.86%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s8474EB07 { width:40.64%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 4 October 2021   FIRST SECTION Application no. 60778/19 ARAB and M.D. and Others against Hungary lodged on 7 November 2019 communicated on 13 September 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the removal of two, unrelated, Afghan families from the Röszke transit zone to Serbia by the Hungarian authorities. The asylum requests of the applicants were found to be inadmissible by the asylum authority and both families were to be expelled to Serbia in February 2019. The applicants unsuccessfully sought judicial review of the decisions. As Serbia refused to readmit the applicants, the immigration authority modified the country of expulsion to Afghanistan. When on 7   May 2019 the applicants’ envisaged removal to Afghanistan did not take place, they were made to leave the Hungarian transit zone at Röszke and cross the border to Serbia during the night. The applicants complain under Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention taken alone and in conjunction with Article 13 of the Convention about their forced removal from Hungary to Serbia which took place without any valid expulsion decision relating to Serbia, without taking into account the fact that Serbia refused to readmit them and without enabling them to consult an interpreter or a lawyer and put forward their arguments against this measure.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Were the applicants, aliens in the respondent State, expelled collectively, in breach of Article   4 of Protocol No.   4 to the Convention? In particular, was their removal to Serbia on 7 May 2019 based on a valid decision which took account of their particular circumstances including Serbia’s refusal to readmit them and was each applicant given the opportunity to put forward his/her arguments against the measure (see Hirsi   Jamaa and Others v. Italy [GC], no.   27765/09, §   177, ECHR 2012, and Georgia v. Russia (I) [GC], no.   13255/07, § 167, ECHR 2014 (extracts))?   2.   Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their complaints under Article 4 of Protocol No. 4, as required by Article   13 of the Convention?     ANNEX   List of applicants     No. Applicant’s Name Year of birth   Household 1 1 Golam Sakhi ARAB 1977 2 Ashurma ARAB 1984 3 Ziba ARAB 2002 4 Mohammad Nabi ARAB 2003 5 Mirjam ARAB 2005         Household 2   1 M.D. 1978 2 S.A. 1988 3 M.A. 2003 4 R.A. 2006 5 M.H. 2013 6 A.A. 2015