issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 173 (2024)
02.07.2024
Judgments of 2 July 2024
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing five judgments1:
two Chamber judgments are summarised below;
three Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, can
The judgments below are only available in English.
B.A. v. Cyprus (application no. 24607/20)
The applicant, Mr B.A., is a Syrian national who was born in 1996 and currently lives in Cyprus.
The case concerns the lawfulness of the applicant’s detention, after arriving in Cyprus as an asylum-
seeker, on national-security grounds and the length of the domestic proceedings lasting over two
years and nine months reviewing the lawfulness of his detention.
The applicant complains that his detention was in breach of Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and
security) of the European Convention on Human Rights and, relying on Article 5 § 4 (right to have
lawfulness of detention decided speedily by a court) of the European Convention, that his right to a
timely decision was infringed and that he was deprived of a review of the lawfulness of his detention
that respected, amongst other things, the principle of equality of arms.
Violation of Article 5 § 1
Violation of Article 5 § 4
Just satisfaction:
non-pecuniary damage: 10,000 euros (EUR)
K.A. v. Cyprus (no. 63076/19)
The applicant, Mr K.A., is a Moroccan national who was born in 1966 and lives in Cyprus.
The case concerns the lawfulness of the applicant’s detention, after arrival in Cyprus as an asylum
seeker, on national-security grounds and the protracted nature of the domestic proceedings.
The applicant complains that his detention from 10 January 2019 to 24 February 2020 and his
detention from 3 April 2020 to June 2020 was unlawful in breach of Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and
security) of the Convention. He complains that the proceedings before the Administrative Court
failed to respect the principle of equality of arms, while the appeal proceedings challenging the
Administrative Court’s decision did not comply with the speediness requirement, in breach of Article
5 § 4 (right to have lawfulness of detention decided speedily by a court).
1
Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber
judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a
panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and
deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the
Convention, judgments delivered by a Committee are final.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution
