Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  X v. THE NETHERLANDS

  No violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Expulsion) (Conditional) (Morocco) (englisch)

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  X v. THE NETHERLANDS

  Art. 3 MRK
  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (11)Zitiert selbst (6)

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 09.01.2018 - 36417/16

  X v. SWEDEN

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.07.2018 - 14319/17

  It further notes that, unlike the situation in the case of X. v. Sweden (no. 36417/16, 9 January 2018), the applicant has been convicted of terrorism-related offences and it must be assumed that the Moroccan authorities are aware of the nature of his conviction in the Netherlands.
• EGMR, 30.05.2013 - 25393/10

  RAFAA c. FRANCE

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.07.2018 - 14319/17

  The Court notes that, unlike the situation in the cases of Rafaa v. France (no. 25393/10, 30 May 2013) and Ouabour v. Belgium (no. 26417/10, 2 June 2015), in which Morocco had requested the applicants' extradition on suspicion of terrorism, no such request has been made in the present case.
• EGMR, 04.09.2014 - 140/10

  Belgien wegen Auslieferung von Ex-Fußballprofi verurteilt

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.07.2018 - 14319/17

  It is not possible to make the activities of the individual concerned, however undesirable or dangerous, a material consideration or to weigh the risk of ill-treatment against the reasons put forward for the expulsion in order to determine whether the responsibility of the State is engaged under Article 3 (see Trabelsi v. Belgium, no. 140/10, §§ 117-118 with further references, ECHR 2014 (extracts)).

• EGMR, 30.10.1991 - 13163/87

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.07.2018 - 14319/17

  The assessment must focus on the foreseeable consequences of the applicant's removal to the country of destination, in the light of the general situation there and of his or her personal circumstances (see, for example, Salah Sheekh v. the Netherlands, no. 1948/04, § 136, 11 January 2007; Vilvarajah and Others v. the United Kingdom, 30 October 1991, §§ 107-108, Series A no. 215; and F.G. v. Sweden, cited above, § 115).
• EGMR, 11.01.2007 - 1948/04

  Somalia, Abschiebungshindernis, zielstaatsbezogene Abschiebungshindernisse, …

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.07.2018 - 14319/17

  The assessment must focus on the foreseeable consequences of the applicant's removal to the country of destination, in the light of the general situation there and of his or her personal circumstances (see, for example, Salah Sheekh v. the Netherlands, no. 1948/04, § 136, 11 January 2007; Vilvarajah and Others v. the United Kingdom, 30 October 1991, §§ 107-108, Series A no. 215; and F.G. v. Sweden, cited above, § 115).
• VGH Baden, 01.06.1949 - 27/48

  Anfechtung einer Beorderung

  Auszug aus EGMR, 10.07.2018 - 14319/17

  In its report on Morocco (UN doc. A/HRC/27/48/Add.5, dated 4 August 2014), the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention welcomed the adoption of the Constitution in July 2011, marking an important step towards the strengthening of human rights, and the establishment of the National Human Rights Council (CNDH) as the independent national institution responsible for the protection and promotion of human rights.

alle Zitatstellen anzeigen
• EGMR, 14.01.2020 - 75953/16

  D AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

  La Cour doit toutefois estimer établi que l'appréciation effectuée par les autorités de l'État contractant concerné est adéquate et suffisamment étayée par les données internes et par celles provenant d'autres sources fiables et objectives, comme par exemple d'autres États contractants ou des États tiers, des agences des Nations Unies et des organisations non gouvernementales réputées pour leur sérieux (ibid., § 117, et X c. Pays-Bas, no 14319/17, § 72, 10 juillet 2018).

  Or le premier requérant n'a apporté aucune preuve établissant que ce principe n'est pas respecté en pratique par les autorités irakiennes (voir, mutatis mutandis et en relation à l'absence de preuve quant au non-respect du même principe par les autorités judiciaires du Royaume du Maroc, X c. Pays-Bas, no 14319/17, § 80, 10 juillet 2018).

• EGMR, 15.04.2021 - 5560/19

  K.I. c. FRANCE

  La Cour doit toutefois vérifier que l'appréciation effectuée par les autorités de l'État contractant concerné est adéquate et suffisamment étayée par les données internes et par celles provenant d'autres sources fiables et objectives (X. c. Pays-Bas, no 14319/17, § 72, 10 juillet 2018).
• EGMR, 09.07.2019 - 3598/10

  KISLOV v. RUSSIA

  A certain degree of speculation is inherent in the preventive purpose of Article 3; it is not a matter of requiring the persons concerned to provide clear proof of their claim that they would be exposed to proscribed treatment (see X v. the Netherlands, no. 14319/17, § 74, 10 July 2018 and cases cited therein).

• EGMR, 22.07.2021 - 39126/18

  E.H. c. FRANCE

  Le Gouvernement relève enfin que la Cour a constaté que le Maroc avait pris des mesures afin de prévenir les risques de torture et de traitements inhumains et dégradants (A.S. c. France, précité, § 62 et, X. c. Pays-Bas, no 14319/17, § 77, 10 juillet 2018).
• EGMR, 22.01.2019 - 74411/16

  SAID ABDUL SALAM MUBARAK v. DENMARK

  Thus, the general situation in Morocco is not of such a nature as to show, on its own, that there would be a breach of the Convention if the applicant were to return there (see, also X v. Sweden, cited above, § 52 and X v. the Netherlands, no. 14319/17, § 77, 10 July 2018).
• EGMR, 02.06.2020 - 49773/15

  S.A. v. THE NETHERLANDS

  A general overview of the relevant domestic law and practice as regards asylum proceedings has been set out in X v. the Netherlands (no. 14319/17, §§ 34-40, 10 July 2018), and the domestic policy in respect of Sudanese asylum-seekers as of 13 June 2018 has been set out in A.S. v. the Netherlands ((dec.), no. 20102/13, 20 November 2018).
• EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 12708/16

  W.M. v. THE NETHERLANDS

  A general overview of the relevant domestic law and practice as regards asylum proceedings has been set out in X v. the Netherlands (no. 14319/17, §§ 34-40, 10 July 2018).
• EGMR - 7740/26 (anhängig)

  G.B. v. THE NETHERLANDS

  In particular, in assessing the applicant's credibility, did the authorities adequately take into account her medical and psychological condition, including the possible impact of trauma on her ability to give credible, consistent and detailed statements (F.G. v. Sweden [GC], no. 43611/11, § 118, 23 March 2016; X v. the Netherlands, no. 14319/17, § 72, 10 July 2018)?.
• EGMR, 09.04.2026 - 40788/23

  K c. FRANCE

  Rn. 35 Les principes généraux concernant les affaires d'expulsion ont été résumés dans les arrêts F.G. c. Suède ([GC], no 43611/11, § 110-127, 23 mars 2016), K.I. c. France (no 5560/19, § 115-125, 15 avril 2021), X c. Pays-Bas (no 14319/17, § 71-75, 10 juillet 2018) et U c. France (no 53254/20, § 97-110, 15 février 2024).
• EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 36196/16

  A.I. v. THE NETHERLANDS

  A general overview of the relevant domestic law and practice as regards asylum proceedings has been set out in X v. the Netherlands (no. 14319/17, §§ 34-40, 10 July 2018).
• EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 20102/13

  SABER YACOUB v. THE NETHERLANDS