Dr Lourdes Peroni*, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Ghent University
Human Rights Centre (ECHR aspects) and Professor
Steve Peers (EU law aspects)
In what is possibly one of the
most important judgments of 2016,
Paposhvili v. Belgium,
the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has memorably
reshaped its case law on when Article 3 ECHR (which bans torture or other
inhuman or degrading treatment) applies to the expulsion of seriously ill
migrants. In a unanimous judgment, the Court leaves behind the restrictive
application of the high Article 3 threshold set in
N. v. the United
Kingdom and pushes for a more rigorous assessment of the risk of ill-treatment
in these cases. For us at the
Human
Rights Centre of Ghent University, it was a thrill to intervene as a
third party in such an important case. In
our
third party intervention we submitted that
Paposhvili offered a unique opportunity to depart from the
excessively restrictive approach adopted in N. We are delighted that the
Grand Chamber has seized the opportunity to re-draw the standards in this area
of its case law in a way that does fuller justice to the spirit of Article 3.
This main part of the post
addresses the ECtHR’s interpretation of the ECHR in Paposhvili, while in the Annex to this post, Steve Peers considers
its application within the scope of EU law.
The ECHR judgment
Mr. Paposhvili, a Georgian
national living in Belgium, was seriously ill. He claimed that his expulsion to
Georgia would put him at risk of inhuman treatment and an earlier death due to
the withdrawal of the treatment he had been receiving in Belgium (for more on
the facts, see my previous
post).
He died in Belgium last June, while his case was pending before the Grand
Chamber. The Court did not strike his application out of the list. It found
that “special circumstances relating to respect for human rights” required its
continued examination based on Article 37 § 1 in fine ECHR (§ 133).
The Court held that there would have been a violation of Article 3 if Belgium
had expelled Mr. Paposhvili to Georgia without having assessed “the risk faced
by him in the light of the information concerning his state of health and the
existence of appropriate treatment in Georgia.” It found a similar violation of
Article 8 if Belgium had expelled him without having assessed the impact of his
return on his “right to respect for his family life in view of his state of
health.”
Continue/ lees hier verder:
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.nl/2017/01/expulsion-of-seriously-ill-migrants-new.html
Wellicht is mijn boekenblog ook interessant:
http://dutchysbookreviews.blogspot.nl/l
Interessant artikel? Deel het eens met uw netwerk en help mee met het verspreiden van de bekendheid van dit blog. Er staan wellicht nog meer artikelen op dit weblog die u zullen boeien. Kijk gerust eens rond. Zelf graag wat willen plaatsen? Mail dan webmaster@vreemdelingenrecht.com
In verband met geldwolven die denken geld te kunnen claimen op krantenartikelen die op een blog als deze worden geplaatst maar na meestal een dag voor de krantenlezers aan leeswaardigheid hebben ingeboet terwijl wij vreemdelingenrecht specialisten ze soms wel nog jaren gebruiken om er een kopie van te maken voor een zaak ga ik over tot het plaatsen van alleen het eerste stukje. Ja ik weet het: de kans dat u doorklikt is geringer dan wanneer het hele artikel hier staat en een kopie van het orgineel maken handig kan zijn voor uw zaak.
Wilt u zelf wat overnemen van dit weblog. Dat mag. Zet er alleen even een link bij naar het desbetreffende artikel zodat mensen niet alleen dat wat u knipt en plakt kunnen lezen maar dat ook kunnen doen in de context.
Subscribe to Vreemdelingenrecht.com blog by Email
