Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content

​​

12/07/2016
ECHR - Case concerned to the Administrative detention of children in the context of deportation procedures
12/07/2016
ECHR - Case concerned to the Administrative detention of children in the context of deportation procedures

ECLI
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0712JUD001159312
Input Provided By
EUAA Courts and Tribunals Network
Other Source/Information
Type
Original Documents
Relevant Legislative Provisions
European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
Reference
Council of Europe, European Court of Human Rights [ECtHR], A.B. and Others (Armenia) v France, 11593/12, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0712JUD001159312, 12 July 2016. 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=352
Case history
Other information
Abstract
According to the ECtHR Press Release: The applicants, Mr A.B. and Ms A.A.B. and their son A.B., are Armenian nationals who were born in 1978, 1980 and 2007 respectively. They arrived in France on 4 October 2009, having fled Armenia in fear of persecution as a result of Mr A.B.'s journalistic activity and political involvement. The case primarily concerns the fact of their underage child being placed in administrative detention in the context of a deportation procedure. On 4 October 2009, on the day of their arrival in France they lodged applications for asylum, which were refused by the French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA) and subsequently by the National Asylum Tribunal (CNDA). Their requests for reconsideration were also rejected. The prefect of the Loiret département rejected their applications for residence permits, ordering them to leave the country. The administrative court, in response to a request by the applicants, refused to set aside these deportation orders. Having been arrested by the police after committing a theft, Mr A.B. was immediately placed in police detention. His wife and son were taken into custody on the following day, 17 February 2012, in the Chaigny Reception Centre for Asylum Seekers (CADA), where the family were living. On the same date, the applicants were taken to the Toulouse-Cornebarrieu administrative detention centre (CRA). Mr A.B. and Ms A.A.B. challenged the orders placing them in administrative detention, and, in parallel, they filed an urgent application. They argued that they had a fixed place of residence in a CADA and that, in any event, the placement was incompatible with the best interests of their child. They pointed out that, since he was too young to be left alone, he was obliged to accompany them in their administrative dealings, and to be in close proximity to armed and uniformed police officers. On 21 February 2012 the president of the Toulouse Administrative Court rejected the urgent application, without a hearing. On the same date the Toulouse Administrative Court rejected the application to have the administrative detention order set aside. On 24 February 2012 the applicants submitted to the Court, under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, a request for the suspension of the order for placement in the administrative detention centre. The Court declined to indicate an interim measure in response to that request. On 5 March 2012 the applicants were released after having indicated their wish to return to Armenia and having requested, for that purpose, assistance with a view to voluntary return. They did not leave France, however, on account of their son's health. By two judgments of 15 November 2012, the Bordeaux Administrative Court of Appeal set aside the judgments of 17 February 2012 ordering their placement in administrative detention. The applicants alleged that the placement in administrative detention of their son, then aged four, in the Toulouse-Cornebarrieu administrative detention centre amounted to treatment contrary to the provisions of Article 3 (prohibition of torture and of inhuman or degrading treatment). They submitted that the placement of their child in detention had been ordered in breach of Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security) and § 4 (right to speedy review of the lawfulness of detention) and that it had infringed their right to respect for family life, a right protected by Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life).
Country of Decision
Council of Europe
Court Name
CoE: European Court of Human Rights [ECtHR]
Case Number
11593/12
Date of Decision
12/07/2016
Country of Origin
Armenia
Keywords
Detention / Alternatives to detention
Medical condition
Minor / Best interests of the child
Return/Removal/Deportation
Source
ECHR