Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
19/10/2023
The ECtHR found a violation of Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention for overcrowded and poor hygienic conditions in which an applicant was held for eighteen days in a hotspot in Lampedusa.

ECLI
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:1019JUD002086020
Input Provided By
EUAA IDS
Other Source/Information
Type
Judgment
Original Documents
Relevant Legislative Provisions
European Convention on Human Rights
Reference
Council of Europe, European Court of Human Rights [ECtHR], A.S. v Italy, No 20860/20, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:1019JUD002086020, 19 October 2023. 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=3763
Case history
Other information
Abstract

The case concerned the detention of the applicant in a hotspot in Lampedusa and the poor conditions faced in the Early Reception and Aid Centre (Centro di Soccorso e Prima Accoglienza – CSPA). On 25 October 2019 the applicant was transferred to a reception centre in Agrigento and he filed an asylum request the same day which was rejected as manifestly unfounded and on 2 November 2019 an expulsion order was adopted along with a detention order issued by the Agrigento police commissioner for the applicant’s detention at the Caltanissetta Repatriation Detention Centre (CPR) for the time necessary to effect the applicant’s repatriation. The applicant challenged the measures, and the Agrigento Justice of the Peace revoked the order for the expulsion of the applicant from Italy due to procedural issues.


 


The court found a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on grounds that the applicant stayed in the hotspot at Lampedusa for eighteen days, from 8 October 2019 until 25 October 2019, in overcrowded conditions and poor hygienic conditions, and rejected the objections of the Government that the applicant lacked victim status.


The court also concluded to a violation of Article 5 §§ 1, 2 and 4 of the Convention in view of the lack of a clear and accessible legal basis for the applicant’s detention. The court noted that the authorities did not inform the applicant of the legal reasons for his deprivation of liberty or omitted to have provided him with sufficient information or enable him to challenge the grounds for his de facto detention before a court.


Country of Decision
Council of Europe
Court Name
CoE: European Court of Human Rights [ECtHR]
Case Number
No 20860/20
Date of Decision
19/10/2023
Country of Origin
Unknown
Keywords
Detention/ Alternatives to Detention
Torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
Source
HUDOC