CASE OF ILIAS AND AHMED v. HUNGARY
Hearing: Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary (no. 47287/15) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2018-04-18 00:00:00)
Application no.: 47287/15
Document type: CHAMBER
Document date: 2017-03-14 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0314JUD004728715
Respondent state: HUN
Articles of the Convention: 3;5;5-1;5-1-f;5-4;13;13+3;35;41
Judges: András Sajó;Ganna Yudkivska;Krzysztof Wojtyczek;Marko Bošnjak;Nona Tsotsoria;Vincent A. De Gaetano;Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer
Represented by: POHARNOK B.
Issue: Articles 31 § 8 (b), 33, 38 § 1 and 43 of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (recast) ; Article 8 § 1 of Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection (recast) ; Sections 2, 2(k), 31/A , 66 (2) d,  71/A (1), (2) and (7) of Act no. LXXX of 2007 on Asylum (“the Asylum Act”) ; Government Decree no. 191/2015. (VII.21.) on the definition of safe countries of origin and safe third countries

Strasbourg case-law cited: Aden Ahmed v. Malta, no. 55352/12, §§ 97-99, 23 July 2013;Amuur v. France, 25 June 1996, § 43, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996 III;Anheuser-Busch Inc. v. Portugal [GC], no. 73049/01, § 86, ECHR 2007 I;Arat v. Turkey, no. 10309/03, § 46, 10 November 2009;Austin and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 39692/09, 40713/09 and 41008/09, §§ 57-58, ECHR 2012;Belevitskiy v. Russia, no. 72967/01, § 91, 1 March 2007;Creangă v. Romania [GC], no. 29226/03, § 91, 23 February 2012;De Tommaso v. Italy [GC], no. 43395/09, § 80, 23 February 2017;F.G. v. Sweden [GC], no. 43611/11, ECHR 2016;Guzzardi v. Italy, 6 November 1980, § 95, Series A no. 39;H.L. v. the United Kingdom, no. 45508/99, § 91, ECHR 2004 IX;H.M. v. Switzerland, no. 39187/98, § 45, ECHR 2002 II;Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy [GC], no. 27765/09, ECHR 2012;Jeunesse v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 12738/10, § 110, 3 October 2014;Khlaifia and Others v. Italy [GC], no. 16483/12, 15 December 2016;Kholmurodov v. Russia, no. 58923/14, § 84, 1 March 2016;Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 157, ECHR 2000 XI;Lokpo and Touré v. Hungary, no. 10816/10, § 22, 20 September 2011;M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece [GC], no. 30696/09, § 223, ECHR 2011;Mahamed Jama v. Malta, no. 10290/13, § 100, 26 November 2015;Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey [GC], nos. 46827/99 and 46951/99, § 69, ECHR 2005 I;Medvedyev and Others v. France [GC], no. 3394/03, § 79, ECHR 2010;Mogoş v. Romania (dec.), no. 20420/02, 6 May 2004;Mooren v. Germany [GC], no 11364/03, § 79, 9 July 2009;Muminov v. Russia, no. 42502/06, §§ 91-92, 11 December 2008;Murray v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 10511/10, § 83, ECHR 2016;N.A. v. the United Kingdom, no. 25904/07, § 119, 17 July 2008;Nakhmanovich v. Russia, no. 55669/00, § 70, 2 March 2006;Nizomkhon Dzhurayev v. Russia, no. 31890/11, § 113, 3 October 2013;R.C. v. Sweden, no. 41827/07, § 52, 9 March 2010;Riad and Idiab v. Belgium, nos. 29787/03 and 29810/03, §§ 68-71, 24 January 2008;Rohlena v. the Czech Republic [GC], no. 59552/08, § 51, ECHR 2015;Saadi v. Italy [GC], no. 37201/06, ECHR 2008;Shamsa v. Poland, nos. 45355/99 and 45357/99, § 47, 27 November 2003;Stanev v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 36760/06, ECHR 2012;Stašaitis v. Lithuania, no. 47679/99, § 67, 21 March 2002;Storck v. Germany, no. 61603/00, § 73, ECHR 2005‑V;Takush v. Greece, no. 2853/09, § 40, 17 January 2012;Ullens de Schooten and Rezabek v. Belgium, nos. 3989/07 and 38353/07, § 54, 20 September 2011;Üner v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 46410/99, § 54, ECHR 2006 XII;Waite and Kennedy v. Germany [GC], no. 26083/94, § 54, ECHR 1999 I
External sources: “Hungary as a country of asylum. Observations on restrictive legal measures and subsequent practice implemented between July 2015 and March 2016” report by the UNHCR (published in May 2016);“Crossing Boundaries: The new asylum procedure at the border and restrictions to accessing protection in Hungary” report by the European Council for Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) (prepared on 1 October 2015);“Case Law Fact Sheet: Prevention of Dublin Transfers to Hungary” report by the European Council for Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) (prepared in January 2016);Report to the Hungarian Government on its visit to Hungary from 21 to 27 October 2015 by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT)

Conclusion: Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1 - Lawful arrest or detention;Article 5-1-f - Expulsion;Prevent unauthorised entry into country);Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-4 - Review of lawfulness of detention);No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Inhuman treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 13+3 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy) (Article 3 - Inhuman treatment;Prohibition of torture);Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Expulsion) (Serbia);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: FALSE