On September 28, 2020, the case was won in the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child

Заголовок: On September 28, 2020, the case was won in the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child Сведения: 2024-06-02 04:52:50

The case of V.A. v. Italy. Views of the Committee on the Rights of the Child of 28 September 2020. Communication No. 56/2018.

In 2018, the author of the communication was assisted in preparing a complaint. Subsequently, the complaint was communicated to Italy.

As seen from the text of the Considerations, the author argued that by not taking into account the vulnerability of minors E.A. and Y.A. when deciding not to consider the case and when committing acts violating their rights at the time of the attempted expulsion, the State party violated its obligation to comply with the Convention on the Rights of the Child, provided for in article 2 (paragraph 3.1 of the Considerations).

Legal positions of the Committee: As a rule, the examination of facts and evidence falls within the competence of national authorities, except in cases where such examination is obviously arbitrary or amounts to a denial of justice. In this regard, the Committee does not replace national authorities in interpreting national legislation and evaluating facts and evidence, but it is obliged to verify the absence of arbitrariness or denial of justice in the assessment of the authorities and ensure that the principle of the best interests of the child was used as the main criterion in this assessment (paragraph 7.2 of the Views) (Case "S.E. v. Belgium", paragraph 8.4.).

Article 12 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child guarantees the right of the child to be heard in any judicial or administrative proceedings affecting the child, either directly or through a representative. However, article 12 does not establish any age restriction on the child's right to express his or her views, and the Convention does not encourage States parties to introduce age restrictions in law or in practice that would infringe on the child's right to be heard on all matters affecting him or her. The Committee recalls that the determination of the best interests of children requires that their situation be assessed separately, despite the reasons for which their parents applied for asylum (paragraph 7.3 of the Views).

The Committee's assessment of the factual circumstances of the case: The Committee took note of the author's claim that the State party violated article 12 of the Convention, since the national authorities did not hear the minors E.A. and Y.A. and did not pay attention to the communications and evidence presented during the proceedings. The Committee took into account the State party's arguments that E.A. and Y.A. were not heard due to their young age, as well as the fact that the children's interests coincided with those of their mother and that they could exercise their right to be heard through their mother and lawyer. The Committee did not share the State party's argument that there was no need to hear E.A. and Y.A., since their interests coincide with those of their mother. The Committee considered that, in the circumstances of the present case, the failure to hear the children directly constituted a violation of article 12 of the Convention (paragraph 7.3 of the Views).

The Committee considered the author's claim that the authorities had failed to take into account the traumatic experiences experienced by the children, including having to flee their country of origin twice, in one case through a third country, as well as their return to their homeland and another attempt to escape in very traumatic circumstances. The Committee considered that, by not hearing E.A. and Y.A. on these facts, the consequences of which for them may differ greatly from those for their mother, the national authorities did not exercise due diligence in assessing the best interests of their interests (paragraph 7.4 of the Considerations).

The Committee's conclusions: The facts presented indicated a violation by the State party of articles 3 and 12 of the Convention.

 

 

© 2011-2018 Юридическая помощь в составлении жалоб в Европейский суд по правам человека. Юрист (представитель) ЕСПЧ.