A., B.

The four applicants, nationals of Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, had been charged in their countries of origin with religious and politically motivated crimes. After being charged their pre-trial detention was ordered in absentia, and international search warrants were issued by the authorities. Subsequently the Russian authorities took final decisions to extradite or expel each of the applicants, despite consistent claims that in the event of removal the applicants would face a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention (ECtHR, 2018)

Gender: .
State of concern: .

Who, Why and How exiled:

A. (*1985) is charged with extremism in his home country Uzbekistan (ECHR, 2018).

Category of exile: . (Definitions here.)
Alleged affiliation: Alleged religious extremist.

Which stages experienced: Stage 1   Stage 2   not Stage 3. (Definitions here.)
Date of most serious incident: 2016.
Violence experienced: .

Stage 1 details (accusations/ charges/ Interpol notice/ extradition requests):

On 22 May 2015 an international search warrant and a detention order for A. were issued in absentia by Uzbek authorities. The expulsion was ordered by the Odintsovskiy Town Court of Moscow Region on 1 December 2014 which A. never complied with. Thus, he stayed in Russia illegally (ECHR, 2018).

Stage 2 details (arrest/ detention/ extradition):

A. was arrested and subsequently detained on 12 May 2016. In November 2016 a prolongation of the detention by the Meshchanskiy District Court of Moscow was ordered against which an appeal stayed without success. On 10 May 2017 A. was released due to expiry of the maximum statutory period of detention but immediately arrested and detained again pending expulsion. A. managed to escape from the courthouse on  12 May 2017 but was captured four days later.

The ECHR ordered interim measures preventing the removal of A. from Russia on 30 May 2017. However, on 2 June 2017 A.’s expulsion was upheld by the final judgment of the Moscow City Court. Yet, later, on 10 November 2017 the enforcement of expulsion was suspended by the Moscow City Court in view of the interim measures. In June of the following year the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation annulled the judgment of the Moscow City Court and ordered reconsideration. This led to an upkeep of A.'s expulsion by the final judgment of the Moscow City Court on 24 July 2018, while the enforcement of expulsion was suspended in view of the interim measure applied by the Court. (ECHR, 2018) In October 2018 the ECHR ruled to replace the interim measures that A. should not be removed from Russia with a final judgement with the same effect (EDAL, 2018).

Other actions during Stages 1–3 (dispossession/ overseas assets frozen/ intimidation/ action against associates/ …):

In October 2016 as well as January 2017 the migration authorities refused to grant refugee status to A. (ECHR, 2018)

International arrest warrant: .

Countries of transit, asylum and/or residence: .

Legal status (refugee/ asylum seeker/ resident):

24 July 2018 – the applicant’s expulsion upheld by the final judgement of the Moscow City Court; the enforcement of expulsion suspended in view of the interim measure applied by the Court ( ECHR, 2018).

Press sources:

EDAL, 2018 ‘ECtHR Delivers Judgment on a Case of Removal from Russia of Uzbek and Tajik Nationals | European Database of Asylum Law’  https://www.asylumlawdatabase.eu/en/content/ecthr-delivers-judgment-case-removal-russia-uzbek-and-tajik-nationals [accessed 2 June 2019]

Legal sources:

ECHR Application: 37702/17 (B.A.). ECHR, ‘A.N. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA’, 2018 https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22fulltext%22:[%2237702/17%22]} [accessed 10 Sept 2020]