International

UN Committee against Torture November 14, 2025 CAT/C/83/D/1121/2022

Disposition The Committee decided “That the communication is inadmissible under article 22 (5) (b) of the Convention”, having found that “the complainant had an available and effective remedy that he failed to exhaust” (paragraphs 7.6 and 8).

The Federal Office for Migration and Refugees rejected his asylum application on 22 November 2019, and the Augsburg Administrative Court dismissed his appeal on 28 April 2020 (paragraphs 2.3 and 2.5). His second application, based on documents from the Turkish police investigation file, was rejected on 10 March 2021, and the Augsburg court upheld that decision on 20 May 2021 (paragraphs 2.6, 2.7 and 2.10). He did not seek leave to appeal to the Higher Administrative Court of Bavaria, citing a lack of money and that court’s rejection of his earlier appeal (paragraph 2.15). On 11 February 2022 the Committee asked Germany “not to deport the complainant to Türkiye while the communication was being considered by the Committee”, and on 29 May 2025 it “denied a request by the State Party to lift the interim measures” (paragraphs 1.2 and 1.3). It then held that a request for leave to appeal “would have allowed the Higher Administrative Court of Bavaria to examine this new evidence”, that he had not produced “any proof of lack of financial resources or of an attempt to have sought legal aid”, and that “the mere fact of doubting the effectiveness of a remedy does not absolve the complainant from the obligation to exhaust” (paragraphs 7.4 and 7.5).

Convention Against Torture Non-refoulement Deportation Interim measures Exhaustion of remedies

Caution The Committee did not decide whether deportation to Türkiye would expose him to torture. The decision does not record whether he has since been deported, and the Coalition has not read a source that does.

UN Committee against Torture November 1, 2024 CAT/C/81/D/1138/2022

Disposition “At its meeting on 1 November 2024, the Committee, having been informed by the complainants’ counsel that they had been granted refugee status and residence permits, decided to discontinue the consideration of communication No. 1138/2022.”

The complaint was submitted against Germany on 3 June 2022 by counsel for five complainants and concerned their deportation to Türkiye. On 1 November 2024 counsel informed the Committee that they had been granted refugee status and residence permits, and the Committee discontinued its consideration of the communication.

Convention Against Torture Non-refoulement Deportation Discontinuance

Caution The Committee decided nothing on the merits. The decision is a single paragraph and gives no facts about the complainants or about any interim measures. The Coalition’s page on Germany cites it among the cases in which the protection mechanisms worked.

UN Committee against Torture May 21, 2013 CAT/C/50/D/430/2010

Disposition “The Committee against Torture, acting under article 22, paragraph 7, of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, is of the view that the information before it discloses a violation by the State party of article 3 of the Convention.” The Committee urged Germany “to provide redress to Onsi Abichou, including adequate compensation”, and asked to be told within 90 days of the steps taken (paragraphs 12 and 13). On its request for interim measures, which Germany did not comply with, it concluded that “in the present instance, the State party cannot be said to have failed to meet its obligations under article 22 of the Convention” (paragraph 9.1).

Germany asked Tunisia for diplomatic assurances in notes verbales of 25 March and 6 May 2010 (paragraph 2.6). The Saarland Regional High Court held the extradition lawful on 20 May 2010 and upheld that decision on 12 July 2010: although aware of reports of the risk of torture in Tunisia, “the Court put its trust in the Tunisian Government” (paragraphs 2.7 and 2.9). The Constitutional Court rejected his urgent appeal on 28 July 2010, and the European Court of Human Rights refused an interim measure on 23 August 2010 (paragraphs 2.10 and 2.11). On 25 August 2010 the Committee asked Germany not to extradite him while it considered the complaint, and he was extradited that day (paragraphs 1.2, 1.3 and 2.12). The Committee held: “Notwithstanding the diplomatic assurances that were provided, the Committee must consider the actual human rights situation in Tunisia at the time of the extradition of the complainant’s husband” (paragraph 11.6). It found that “the authorities of the State party knew or should have known at the time of Onsi Abichou’s extradition that Tunisia routinely resorted to the widespread use of torture against detainees held for political reasons and against detainees charged with ordinary criminal offences”, and that “The fact that diplomatic assurances were obtained was not sufficient grounds for the State party’s decision to ignore this obvious risk, especially since none of the guarantees that were provided related specifically to protection against torture or ill-treatment” (paragraph 11.7). It added: “The fact that Onsi Abichou was ultimately not subjected to such treatment following his extradition cannot be justifiably used to call into question or minimize, retrospectively, the existence of such a risk at the time of his extradition” (paragraph 11.7).

Extradition Convention Against Torture Diplomatic assurances Interim measures

Caution The Committee’s decisions under article 22 of the Convention against Torture are not judgments of a court. It decided after the extradition and assessed the risk as it stood on the day of the extradition. Germany said that the Committee’s request for interim measures reached its competent authorities only after he had been extradited, and the Committee accepted that Germany had not breached article 22 in that respect (paragraph 9.1). The decision does not record what redress, if any, Germany provided, and the Coalition has not read Germany’s reply. The decision was adopted in French; this entry quotes the English text.