ECtHR, XX v. Lithuania, No. 46454/11, 2018
- 2018
- Lithuania
Topics
Membership in a terrorist organisationLegal bases
European Convention on Human RightsCourts
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)Laws
Right to Liberty Torture, degrading and inhuman and treatment Right to an effective remedy Right to respect for private and family lifeFacts
The case concerned the applicant’s allegations that Lithuania had let the United States Central Intelligence Agency transport him on its territory under the secret extraordinary rendition programme and had allowed him to be subjected to ill-treatment and arbitrary detention in a CIA detention “black site”. He also complained that Lithuania had failed to carry out an effective investigation into his allegations.
Legal grounds
Article 3 of the ECHR; Article 5 of the ECHR; Article 8 of the ECHR; Article 13 of the Convention ECHR.
Findings
The Court had no access to the applicant as he was still being held by the US authorities in very restrictive conditions. So, the Court had to check this information from various other sources. In particular, it gained key information from a US Senate Committee report on CIA torture which was released in December 2014. It also heard expert witness testimony. The Court held that in the applicant’s case there had been a violation of Article 3 because of the Government’s failure to effectively investigate his allegations and because of its complicity in the CIA’s action that had led to ill-treatment, as well as violations of Article 5, Article 8 and Article 13 in conjunction with Article 3. The Court noted in particular that Lithuania had hosted a secret CIA prison between February 2005 and March 2006, that the applicant had been detained there, and that the domestic authorities had known the CIA would subject him to treatment contrary to the Convention. Lithuania had also permitted him to be moved to another CIA detention site in Afghanistan, exposing him to further ill-treatment. The Court held that the applicant had been within Lithuania’s jurisdiction and that the country had been responsible for the violations of his rights under the Convention. The Court further recommended that Lithuania conclude a full investigation of the applicant’s case as quickly as possible and, if necessary, punish any officials responsible. It lastly held that the country also had to make further representations to the United States to remove or limit the effects of the violations of his rights.