Greece - Supreme Court, 20 February 2015, 186/2015
Keywords:
| Keywords |
|
Detention
Description
"Restriction on freedom of movement through confinement that is ordered by an administrative or judicial authority(ies) in order that another procedure may be implemented. In an EU asylum context, this means confinement of an asylum seeker by a Member State within a particular place, where the applicant is deprived of his or her freedom of movement. This may occur during any stage of or throughout the asylum process, from the time an initial application is made up to the point of removal of an unsuccessful asylum seeker. In an EU Return context, Member States may only detain or keep in a detention facility a third-country national who is the subject of return procedures in order to prepare the return and/or carry out the removal process, in particular when: (a) there is a risk of absconding; or (b) the third-country national concerned avoids or hampers the preparation of return or the removal process. Any detention shall be for as short a period as possible and only maintained as long as removal arrangements are in progress and executed with due diligence." |
|
Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
Description
A form of serious harm for the purposes of the granting of subsidiary protection. The Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in Celibici defined cruel or inhuman treatment as ‘an intentional act or omission, that is an act which, judged objectively, is deliberate and not accidental, that causes serious mental or physical suffering or injury or constitutes a serious attack on human dignity.’ “Ill-treatment means all forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including corporal punishment, which deprives the individual of its physical and mental integrity." |
|
Refugee Status
Description
The recognition by a Member State of a third-country national or stateless person as a refugee. |
|
Political Opinion
Description
One of the grounds of persecution specified in the refugee definition per Article 1A ofthe1951 Refugee Convention. According to the Qualification Directive the concept of political opinion includes holding an opinion, thought or belief on a matter related to potential actors of persecution and to their policies or methods, whether or not that opinion, thought or belief has been acted upon by the applicant. |
|
Return
Description
"In the context of the Return Directive (2008/115/EC), the process of going back - whether in voluntary compliance with an obligation to return, or enforced - to: - one's country of origin; or - a country of transit in accordance with EU or bilateral readmission agreements or other arrangements; or - another third country, to which the third-country national concerned voluntarily decides to return and in which he/she will be accepted. There are subcategories of return which can describe the way the return is implemented, e.g. voluntary, forced, assisted and spontaneous return; as well as sub-categories which describe who is participating in the return, e.g. repatriation (for refugees)." |
Headnote:
A Turkish National, who has been granted political asylum by the Swiss Government, was detained in Greece. After a decision made by the Greek authorities, his extradition to Turkey was ordered. This decision was quashed by the Greek Supreme Court.
Facts:
M. A. was sentenced by the Turkish authorities to life imprisonment on account of conspiracy and attempt to unlawfully change/alter the Turkish Constitution as part of a terrorist group. He was detained from 5-11-1992 until 16-07-2001, when he was released temporarily from the Turkish prisons because of his poor health due to the conditions of his imprisonment.
Following that, he escaped from Turkey and entered Switzerland, where he sought and was given political asylum. Despite the fact that this protection was still in force, M.A. was arrested and detained in Greece. Under the decision of the Court of first instance his extradition to Turkey was ordered.
Decision & reasoning:
Under the decision of the court of first instance, M.A.'s extradition to Turkey was ordered, in order for him to serve the sentence of aggravated life imprisonment for his attempt to change the constitution in Turkey. The court of second instance took into account the above mentioned sentence, which was documented by the submission of the relevant documents. However, taking into account that the appellant was of Kurdish origin and had an intense political activity in Turkey since his student years, the Court accepted that this fact contributed to some extent to his arrest.
Apart from that, following the verbal confirmation of the Swiss embassy in Greece, it was confirmed that M.A. was an asylum beneficiary in Switzerland and holder of a travelling document, valid in all countries except for Turkey.
According to the above mentioned, the Court accepted that in case of refoulement of the appellant, there would be a well founded fear of persecution and threat of his physical integrity because of his beliefs.
Therefore, it considered that the court of first instance was mistaken regarding the estimation of evidence, quashed the first decision and ordered the removal of the temporary detention of the appellant.
Outcome:
The appeal was accepted.
Observations/comments:
This case summary was written by Stefania Kokkosi and Maria Pilavaki, a student at BPP University.
Relevant International and European Legislation:
Cited National Legislation:
Other sources:
European Convention on Extradition, 13.12.1957, Article 3 (1) and (2).