CASE OF Y.K. v. CROATIA (no. 38776/21)
Machine-found from the cited source, not yet confirmed by a human. Open the source before relying on it.
What was at stake
Whether the applicant’s removal to North Macedonia would expose him to a real risk of treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture, and whether the domestic system provided an effective remedy for that risk.
What happened
The applicant, a Turkish national of Kurdish origin, sought asylum in Croatia. He was expelled to North Macedonia without an assessment of whether it was safe for him or if he would have access to an effective asylum procedure there. The Croatian authorities detained him, prevented him from lodging an asylum claim, and denied his lawyer access to him.
What the court decided
The European Court of Human Rights held that Croatia violated Article 3 of the Convention by expelling the applicant, a Turkish national of Kurdish origin who had sought asylum, to North Macedonia without examining whether it was safe for him, whether he would have access to an effective and adequate asylum procedure there, or whether he risked chain refoulement and treatment prohibited by Article 3 (a violation of the procedural limb of Article 3). The Court also found a violation of Article 13 taken together with Article 3 because the applicant had no effective remedy against his removal. The Croatian authorities had deprived him of his liberty, prevented him from lodging a claim for international protection, and denied his lawyer access to him to stop the lawyer assisting with his case.
How the court got there
The court found that Croatia failed to assess the risk of torture or inhuman treatment the applicant might face in North Macedonia, violating Article 3. The lack of an effective remedy against removal violated Article 13. The procedural failures, including preventing the applicant from lodging an asylum claim and denying legal access, were critical in the court's decision.
Statutes and cases cited
- § Refugee Convention art. 33
- Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister
Categories
This is a research and reference resource, not legal advice. Summaries are prepared from public sources and may be incomplete or out of date. Always read the original judgment or document and consult a qualified lawyer in the relevant jurisdiction before acting.
Narrative summaries on this page are licensed CC BY-NC 4.0. Reuse them with attribution to JusticeHub for non-commercial purposes. Original judgments and source documents remain under their own terms; follow the authoritative link for the source of record.