Implementing ECHR judgments: New factsheet on migration and asylum

The Council of Europe’s Department for the Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights has published a new thematic factsheet on cases related to migration and asylum. 

The factsheet summarises measures reported by 23 member states to protect and further strengthen migration- and asylum-related rights in response to 66 different judgments from the ECHR. It covers topics including access to territory and forced returns, the reception and protection of migrants and asylum seekers, protection from discrimination and hate crime, family life and family reunification and the detention of migrants and asylum seekers.

This is the eleventh in a series of thematic factsheets on changes to national law, policy and practice across Europe linked to the implementation of ECHR judgments. Previous factsheets cover constitutional matters, effective investigations, freedom of religion, the environment, the independence and impartiality of the judicial system, children’s rights, freedom of expression, conditions of detention, LGBTI persons’ rights and freedom of assembly and association. Some of the factsheets are already available in several different languages and further translations are planned. (source: coe.int)

The factsheet is available here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Annual Report on the execution of the European Court's judgments and decisions

Ombudsman inquiry on Commission President’s text messages is a wake-up call for EU

Fully-funded PhD position in AI, Law and Public Power

Ill-treatment of a trainee lawyer at a police station following an anti-globalisation demonstration: Italy violated Article 3 of the ECHR

The Delivery Delay Clause in Residential Construction Contracts: Consumer Protection in Cyprus and Europe

The Concept of "Habitual Residence" as a Jurisdictional Basis in International Parental Responsibility Disputes: The Cypriot Approach

Moving between Member States without an identity card or passport - A fine amounting to 20% of the amount of the offender’s average net monthly income, is not proportionate to the seriousness of the offence