Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content

​​

29/01/2021
CY: The Court underlined the need for individual assessment in line with the principles of proportionality and necessity prior to issuance of detention order pending removal
29/01/2021
CY: The Court underlined the need for individual assessment in line with the principles of proportionality and necessity prior to issuance of detention order pending removal

ECLI
ECLI:CY:DDDP:2021:15
Input Provided By
EUAA Information and Analysis Sector (IAS)
Other Source/Information
Type
Judgment
Original Documents
Relevant Legislative Provisions
Return Directive (Directive 2008/115/EC of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals); Recast Reception Conditions Directive (Directive 2013/33/EU laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection)(recast RCD) and/or RCD 2003/9/CE
Reference
Cyprus, International Protection Administrative Court [Διοικητικό Δικαστήριο Διεθνούς Προστασίας], A. H. (Pakistan) v Director of the Department of Population and Immigration Archives, ΔΚ 73/2020, ECLI:CY:DDDP:2021:15, 29 January 2021. Link redirects to the English summary in the EUAA Case Law Database.
Permanent link to the case
https://caselaw.euaa.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=1622
Case history
Other information
Abstract

The applicant, national of Pakistan, entered legally in Cyprus for studies in 2016, but his residence permit was no longer extended, and he applied for international protection in 2018. His application was rejected and a deportation and detention order were issued against him. The applicant appealed and invoked multiple reasons, including lawfulness and a lack of reasoning and concrete analysis of his personal circumstances.


The Court, although rejecting the appeal, has underlined that the administrative body which issued the detention order did not conduct an individual assessment before adopting the contested decision, nor did it weight and evaluate the principles of proportionality and necessity in the case. The Court found that this is a systemic practice, observed in most cases of similar nature since the administration does not seem to comply with the judicial decision.


Despite all these irregularities, the Court has the competence to assess the legality and correctness of the impugned measure and held that the applicant's detention as justified under an objective criteria, precisely that he submitted that application with the sole purpose of delaying or to cancel the execution of the return decision. In fact, after rejection of his application, the applicant was included on the list of illegal immigrants, that he was aware of the negative decision but he applicant requested the reopening of his application for asylum after the detention and removal orders were issued against him. The Court concluded that the detention decision pending return was correct and lawful against the applicant.


The Court refers to the EASO Judicial Analysis on Detention of applicants for international protection in the context of Common European Asylum System  and cites CJEU case law, mainly FMS and Others vs Országos Idegenrendeszeti Főigazgatóság Dél-alföldi Regionális Igazgatóság and Országos Idegenrendeszeti Főigazgatóság, 14 May 2020 and
Mehmet Arslan vs Police Force of the Czech Republic, Regional Police Directorate of the Usti nad Labem Region, Foreigners Police Station (Policie ČR, Krajské ředitelství policie Ústeckého kraje, odbor cizinecké policie), 30 May 2013.


Country of Decision
Cyprus
Court Name
CY: International Protection Administrative Court [Διοικητικό Δικαστήριο Διεθνούς Προστασίας]
Case Number
ΔΚ 73/2020
Date of Decision
29/01/2021
Country of Origin
Pakistan
Keywords
Detention/ Alternatives to Detention
EUAA Judicial Analysis / EUAA Professional Development Series
Return/Removal/Deportation
Source
CYLAW
RETURN