CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 3 mai 2022

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Legal summary June 2024 H.M.M. and Others v. Latvia (relinquishment) - 42165/21   Article 3 Expulsion Allegations of summary returns (pushbacks) of Iraqi nationals of Kurdish origin at the Latvian-Belarusian border without examination of their asylum claims: relinquishment in favour of the Grand Chamber Degrading treatment Inhuman treatment Allegations of inadequate conditions in a forest near the Latvian-Belarusian border and in a tent in Latvia: relinquishment in favour of the Grand Chamber Article 5 Article 5-1 Deprivation of liberty Article 5-4 Review of lawfulness of detention Take proceedings Allegations of unlawful detention in Latvia of adults and minors in an accommodation centre for detained foreigners without the possibility of review or any effective review: relinquishment to the Grand Chamber Article 13 Effective remedy Alleged lack of an effective remedy for complaints of summary returns (pushbacks) of Iraqi nationals of Kurdish origin at the Latvian-Belarusian border and of inadequate conditions: relinquishment to the Grand Chamber Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 Prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens Allegations of collective expulsion of Iraqi nationals of Kurdish origin at the Latvian-Belarusian border without examination of their asylum claims: relinquishment in favour of the Grand Chamber The applicants are twenty-six Iraqi nationals of Kurdish origin. According to the applicants, on different dates between 10   August 2021 and March 2022, they crossed the Latvian-Belarusian border on foot outside official border crossing points. They submit that their requests for asylum were not registered and reviewed by the Latvian authorities, they suffered from regular pushbacks to Belarus and were stranded near the border in inadequate conditions. On 20   August 2021 eleven applicants (nos.   1-11) (including young children) were allowed to enter Latvia, while fourteen others (nos.   13-26) were allowed into the country on various dates from 26   October 2021 to 23   March 2022. They were all detained and placed in an accommodation centre for detained foreigners and held there for different periods of time ranging from three to six months before being sent back to Iraq. The detention of adult applicants was reviewed and extended by a judge. According to some applicants, before being allowed to enter Latvia, they suffered from daily pushbacks to Belarus. Sometimes they were allowed to stay in a tent on Latvian territory for short periods of time before being pushed back to Belarus. All the applicants were removed from Latvia to Iraq save for the twelfth applicant who travelled to Germany where he applied for asylum. Relying on Article   3 and Article   4 of Protocol No.   4 the applicants complain that they were removed to Belarus without any assessment of their asylum claims. They also complain under Article   3 that in August 2021 they were stranded near the Latvian‑Belorussian border in the forest in inadequate conditions. Those who were held in a tent in the Latvian territory for various short periods of time complain that they were held there in inadequate conditions. Relying on Article   13 they complain that they did not have an effective remedy regarding the above complaints. Furthermore, some of the applicants (adults and children) complain under Article   5 §§   1 and 4 about their deprivation of liberty in the accommodation centre and that they could not challenge its lawfulness or that their appeal was deprived of all substance. On 2   July 2024 a Chamber of the Court relinquished jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. To access legal summaries in English or French click here . For non-official translations into other languages click here .