Strasbourg Observers

View posts from: Migration

  • Philipp Schönberger

E.A. and H.A.A. v. Greece: A U-Turn on Reception Conditions in Greek ‘Hotspots’

October 17, 2025

by Philipp Schönberger1 The European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) inadmissibility decision in E.A. and H.A.A. v. Greece published on 4 September 2025 marks a potential turning point in its assessment of asylum seekers’ reception conditions in the Greek ‘hotspots.’ The case signals a regressive shift in the Court’s jurisprudence, one that lacks sound justification, but fits […]

  • Alex Geraki Trimi

Asking migrants to document their killing: Almukhlas and Al-Maliki v. Greece

September 05, 2025

by Alex Geraki Trimi The case of Almukhlas and Al-Maliki v. Greece concerned the interception of a yacht carrying 94 migrants near the Greek island of Symi by members of the Greek Coast Guard and Frontex (under the Joint operation Poseidon) that resulted in the killing of a child of Iraqi nationality, Ameer, by the […]

  • Georgios Serghides

Stereotyped narratives on migration: Is the ECtHR’s reasoning stereotype-proof?

August 29, 2025

by Georgios A. Serghides[i] *** A note from the team: To celebrate the 15th anniversary of the Strasbourg Observers Blog, we organised an in-person symposium with scholars, practitioners, and members of the ECtHR on 8–9 May 2025 in Ghent. Connecting in person with so many regular contributors was a wonderful experience and led to engaging […]

  • Dolores Morondo Taramundi

The Role of Vulnerability and Stereotyping in Addressing Discrimination Against Migrants

August 26, 2025

by Dr Dolores Morondo Taramundi *** To celebrate the 15th anniversary of the Strasbourg Observers Blog, we organised an in-person symposium with scholars, practitioners, and members of the ECtHR on 8–9 May 2025 in Ghent. Connecting in person with so many regular contributors was a wonderful experience and led to engaging dialogue with current and […]

  • Mónica Ávila Currás

From dialogue to strategy in migration cases: Third-party interventions by states as a risky patch to a systemic tension

August 19, 2025

By Mónica Ávila Currás *** To celebrate the 15th anniversary of the Strasbourg Observers Blog, we organised an in-person symposium with scholars, practitioners, and members of the ECtHR on 8–9 May 2025 in Ghent. Connecting in person with so many regular contributors was a wonderful experience and led to engaging dialogue with current and former […]

  • Alex Geraki Trimi, Pedro Sanz Díaz

The ECtHR and the Forced–Voluntary Migration Binary: Unquestioned Assumptions and Evolving Patterns

August 08, 2025

Alex Geraki Trimi and Pedro Sanz Díaz *** To celebrate the 15th anniversary of the Strasbourg Observers Blog, we organised an in-person symposium with scholars, practitioners, and members of the ECtHR on 8–9 May 2025 in Ghent. Connecting in person with so many regular contributors was a wonderful experience and led to engaging dialogue with […]

  • Jessica Klüger

Litigation and Influence: Unpacking the Institutional Dynamics of the Strasbourg Court in Responding to Governments’ Arguments in Migration Case Law

August 05, 2025

by Jessica Klüger *** To celebrate the 15th anniversary of the Strasbourg Observers Blog, we organised an in-person symposium with scholars, practitioners, and members of the ECtHR on 8–9 May 2025 in Ghent. Connecting in person with so many regular contributors was a wonderful experience and led to engaging dialogue with current and former judges […]

  • Thomas Spijkerboer

Disneyland Strasbourg: S.S. and Others v. Italy

July 09, 2025

By Thomas Spijkerboer The Court’s inadmissibility decision of 12 June 2025 in S.S. and Others v. Italy is the end of a story that began 3.140 days before. 

  • Ellen Desmet, Ilse Derluyn and Sara Lembrechts

A mixed assessment on age assessment: F.B. v. Belgium

May 09, 2025

By Ellen Desmet, Ilse Derluyn and Sara Lembrechts F.B. v. Belgium concerns the decision of the Belgian Guardianship Service to terminate the support of an unaccompanied minor following an age assessment. While the ECtHR found a violation of Article 8 ECHR due to a lack of sufficient safeguards, it did not substantively engage with the […]

  • Sophie Bols

In the footsteps of Darboe and Camara – Age assessment of unaccompanied minors in A.C. v. France: between procedure and protection

April 04, 2025

By Sophie Bols On 16 January 2025, the European Court of Human Rights issued another judgment, A.C. v. France, on age assessment procedures for unaccompanied minors and held that there was a violation of Article 8 ECHR. The Court emphasises the importance of procedural safeguards, reaffirming some of the findings established in Darboe and Camara […]

  • Sarah Ganty and Eva Brems

The HRC Submits a Third-Party Intervention in Obaidi and Al Farj to the ECtHR: On the Ongoing Rule of Law Crisis and Asylum Seekers’ Rights Violation in Belgium

December 06, 2024

By Sarah Ganty and Eva Brems[1] Earlier this fall, the Human Rights Centre of Ghent University submitted a third-party intervention in the communicated cases of Obaidi and Others v. Belgium and Al Farj and Others v. Belgium, relating to the ‘post-Camara’ context. In these cases, the Court is faced with similar questions as in the […]

  • Moritz Baumgärtel

Whatever happened to Greek hotspots? The routine handling of routine violations in M.A. and others v. Greece

October 11, 2024

Moritz Baumgärtel On 3 October 2024, the Fifth Section of the ECtHR, sitting as a Committee, delivered its judgment in the case of M.A. and others v. Greece. The Court found a violation of Article 3 ECHR due to the unacceptable living conditions in the Chios Vial and Samos Reception and Identification Centres (“RICs”). Together […]

  • Maja Lysienia

For better or for worse? Grand Chamber takes over cases concerning pushbacks at the Belarusian border

September 06, 2024

Maja Lysienia For over three years now, crisis at the Belarusian border has been testing national authorities’ commitment to human rights. Since July 2021, Belarus has allowed for, facilitated or forced the irregular entry of third-country nationals to the EU. This new state conduct was quickly labelled as an “instrumentalization of migration”. Poland, Lithuania and […]

  • Felix Peerboom

A.D. v Malta: The Continuous Application of a Defective Asylum System

January 12, 2024

by Felix Peerboom On 17 October 2023, the European Court for Human Rights (ECtHR, the Court) published its ruling in A.D. v. Malta (press release available in English and French). The Court’s condemnation of Malta in this case for its ill-treatment of the applicant — a vulnerable asylum-seeker and presumed minor suffering from tuberculosis (TB), […]

  • Lorenzo Bernardini

H.M. and Others v. Hungary: Immigration Detention, Burden of Proof and Principle of Necessity: Weakening Safeguards at the Borders?

August 19, 2022

By Lorenzo Bernardini Introduction How high is the burden of proof on the foreigner who claims to have suffered degrading treatments? In which cases may the authorities adopt coercive methods against a foreigner already detained? The European Court of Human Rights (‘the Court’, ‘the ECtHR’ or ‘the Strasbourg Court’) was called upon to answer these […]

  • Strasbourg Observers

Proving minority: the Human Rights Centre and CESSMIR submit a third party intervention regarding age assessment of unaccompanied minors

May 23, 2022

By Mathilde Brackx and Laura Cools The Human Rights Centre of Ghent University (Belgium) and the Centre for the Social Study of Migration and Refugees (CESSMIR) recently submitted a third-party intervention (TPI) before the European Court of Human Rights in the communicated case of F.B. v. Belgium. The case concerns a decision of the Belgian […]

  • Guest Blogger

Unuane v United Kingdom: does the Convention require “pure” proportionality?

December 23, 2020

By Lewis Graham (PhD Researcher at Pembroke College, Cambridge) The Fourth Section recently delivered its judgment in Unuane v United Kingdom, in which it found that the UK had breached Article 8 ECHR through approving the deportation of an individual without properly evaluating the impact this would have on his private and family life under […]

  • Guest Blogger

The case of Muhammad and Muhammad v. Romania: the first Grand Chamber judgment on article 1 of Protocol Nr. 7 ECHR (procedural safeguards with regard to expulsion of aliens)

October 29, 2020

By Bahija Aarrass (Assistant professor of administrative and migration law at the Open University Netherlands) In the judgment in the case of Muhammad and Muhammad v. Romania, the Grand Chamber  of the European Court of Human Rights held that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 7 of the ECHR, which […]

  • Strasbourg Observers

A right to regularize unlawful residence? Pormes v. Netherlands untangled

September 18, 2020

By Mark Klaassen (assistant professor of immigration law at the Europa Institute of Leiden University) To what extent can irregular migrants rely on the protection of Article 8 ECHR to regularize their irregular residence? The European Court of Human Rights (the Court) has dealt with this issue before, in different cases with various factual backgrounds. […]

  • Guest Blogger

‘Tell me your story, but hurry up because I have to expel you’ – Asady and Others v. Slovakia: how to (quickly) conduct individual interviews and (not) apply the ND & NT “own culpable conduct” test to collective expulsions

May 06, 2020

By Francesco Luigi Gatta, Research Fellow, UCLouvain, member of EDEM (Equipe droits européens et migrations) On 24 March 2020, the ECtHR delivered its judgment in Asady and Others v. Slovakia, which concerned the expulsion to Ukraine of a group of Afghan nationals. With a controversial ruling (passed by a slight majority of 4 votes to […]

1 2 3