DignITA Database

DATA: 27/05/2019

STRUMENTI CORRELATI:

NOTE:

La corte rigetta il ricorso e condanna il ricorrente al pagamento delle spese processuali.

Riferimenti agli obblighi di criminalizzazione:

Considerando in diritto, paragrafi 1.3, 1.5, 2.2

DATA: 19/02/2009

STRUMENTI CORRELATI:

Art. 5 ECHR; Art. 3 ECHR; Art. 13 ECHR.

NOTE:

The Court held unanimously that there had been:
– no violation of Article 3 (prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment) taken alone or in conjunction with Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the European Convention on Human Rights in respect of all the applicants, except the Moroccan applicant whose complaints under these articles were declared inadmissible;
– a violation of Article 5.1 (right to liberty and security) of the Convention in respect of all the applicants, except the Moroccan and French applicants who had elected to leave the United Kingdom, since it could not be said that the applicants were detained with a view to deportation and since, as the House of Lords had found, the derogating measures which permitted their indefinite detention on suspicion of terrorism discriminated unjustifiably between nationals and non-nationals;
– a violation of Article 5.4 (right to have lawfulness of detention decided by a court) in respect of two of the Algerian applicants, the stateless and Tunisian applicants, because they had not been able effectively to challenge the allegations against them; and,
– a violation of Article 5.5 in respect of all the applicants, except the Moroccan and French applicants, on account of the lack of an enforceable right to compensation for the above violations.

The Court recognized that indefinite detention without formal charges undermines human dignity and is not compatible with the rule of law, even in times of emergency. (paragraph 128)