Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

JUBAIL v. ITALY

Doc ref: 72234/17 • ECHR ID: 001-178276

Document date: October 6, 2017

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 0

JUBAIL v. ITALY

Doc ref: 72234/17 • ECHR ID: 001-178276

Document date: October 6, 2017

Cited paragraphs only

Communicated on 6 October 2017

Application no 72234/17 Ahamed JUBAIL against Italy lodged on 6 October 2017

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a Bangladeshi national born on 2 December 1999. He is represented before the Court by his guardian as well as by a legal representative. Upon his arrival in Italy, on 30 November 2016, he was hosted in the “Extraordinary reception Centre for adults San Nicola Pellegrino”, in Trani .

On 19 April 2017, the Juvenile Court of Bari granted the applicant ’ s custody to the Social Service of Bari, appointed a guardian and ordered to take all the necessary measures to ensure a suitable accommodation to the applicant, taking into account his status of unaccompanied minor.

On 30 May 2017, the applicant ’ s guardian, noting that the applicant was still hosted in the above mentioned centre for adults, reported the situation to the Social Service and to the Juvenile Court of Bari asking for his transfer to a centre for unaccompanied minors.

By a decision of 20 July 2017, the Juvenile Court of Bari ordered the urgent transfer of the applicant in a structure suitable for minors.

However, this measure was not enforced. Therefore, for approximately eleven months, the applicant has been obliged to live in a centre for adults w h ere approximatively twenty-four people are currently lodged in four rooms.

COMPLAINTS

1. Invoking Article 3 of the Convention, the applicant complains of reception conditions in the “ Centre San Nicola Pellegrino ”, in Trani , where he share s a room with six adults and where the conditions are not suitable to his vulnerable situation of unaccompanied minor.

2. He invokes also Article 8 of the Convention, stating that the situation described above seriously affects his right to respect for private life and claiming his right to live in an environment respectful of his personality and culture.

3. The applicant finally invokes Article 2 of Protocol no 1 to the Convention, alleging that his right to education has been violated given that he is not allowed to attend school and to receive an appropriate education and training in view of his integration in Italy.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Has there been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention due to the reception ’ s conditions of the applicant at the Centre “San Nicola Pellegrino” in Trani ?

2. Have the national authorities adopted all measures imposed by domestic and international law in order to ensure an adequate protection of the applicant ’ s rights under Articles 3 (prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment) and 8 (respect for private life) of the Convention, considering his status of unaccompanied minor?

3. Has the applicant been denied the right to education, guaranteed by Article 2 of Protocol No. 1?

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846