ECtHR, XX v. Belgium, No. 50012/08, 2012

• 2012
• Belgium

Topics

Membership in a terrorist organisation Terrorism propaganda Public security

Legal bases

European Convention on Human Rights

Courts

European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

Laws

Right to Liberty Right to a fair trial Proportionality Effective official investigation into the allegations

Relevant links

• https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-108834%22]} https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng-press#{%22itemid%22:[%22003-3827100-4392255%22]}

Facts

The applicant is an Iraqi national that arrived in Belgium in 2000 and requested asylum protection alleging persecution by members of Saddam Hussein’s regime. In 2003, the applicant was arrested on charged of criminal association, fraud and forgery, suspicion of having links with the terrorist association Al-Qaeda and of participating in supplying forged documents intended to facilitate the entry of Islamists into Europe. Relying on Article 3, the applicant complained that he had been returned to Iraq. He further alleged that his first period of detention in a closed transit centre from 2007 to 2009, and his second period of detention in a closed transit from 2010 until his return to Iraq had been arbitrary and the decision as to the lawfulness of his detention had not been made speedily.

Legal grounds

Article 3 of the ECHR (prohibition of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment); Article 5§1 of the ECHR (right to liberty and security); Article 5§4 of the ECHR (right to a speedy decision on the lawfulness of detention)

Findings

Regarding the first period of detention the Court considered that the applicant had not benefited from the right to a speedy decision on the lawfulness of his detention. Therefore, it concluded that there had been a violation of Article 5§4 of the Convention. It further held that there had been a violation of Article 5§1 of the Convention in respect of the first and second period of detention in a closed transit, and measures to extend his detention. The Court noted that Article 3 prohibited in absolute terms torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the victim’s conduct, and even in the most difficult circumstances such as the fight against terrorism. The Court held violation of Article 3 of the Convention in respect of the return of the applicant to Iraq.