Extradition to Azerbaijan from Russian Federation on charges of organizing illegal departure

Facts

The author is a national of Azerbaijan whose sister married a prominent political figure in Azerbaijan. Due to domestic violence and abuse, the author’s sister fled Azerbaijan and the author submits that since then he has been persecuted by the police, detained several times and subject to ill-treatment in detention. The author fled to Egypt where he was granted refugee status and later moved to the Russian Federation in 2015. The author’s sister and children were forced to return to Azerbaijan, and they again managed to flee to Georgia where they were granted asylum. In 2014, the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Azerbaijan opened a criminal investigation against those allegedly involved in the illegal departure of the author’s sister and the author was charged in absentia.

The author was put on a wanted list and a District Court ordered his arrest in absentia. In 2015 the author was arrested in Moscow pursuant to the international search initiated by Azerbaijan and a District Court ordered that he be remanded in detention which was extended. An extradition request by Azerbaijan was also submitted with the assurance that the author’s life would not be subject to any risk on his extradition to Azerbaijan. In 2015, while in detention, the author lodged a request for refugee status which was rejected. The author’s appeal and a request for temporary refugee status were also rejected. In 2016, the extradition request was granted, and the author challenged the same before the City Court where a representative of the UNHCR also submitted how there was a real risk to persons considered as political opponents in Azerbaijan. However, the City Court rejected the author’s complaint and on appeal, it was upheld by the Supreme Court.

In 2017, the author requested the European Court of Human Rights to apply interim measures to prevent his extradition which was rejected for failing to comply with the admissibility criteria and his case was never considered on merits. The author claims in the communication that in the event of his extradition to Azerbaijan, he would be at a risk of being subject to torture in violation of article 7 of the Covenant. Post the submission of the communication, the author was detained by Russian authorities and despite being informed of the interim measures applied by the Committee, the police did not release him.

Interim measures: The Committee noted that the adoption of interim measures was vital to its function and that by failing to respect the request for interim measures transmitted to the State party on two occasions, the State party had failed its obligations under article 1 of the Optional Protocol.

Admissibility

Contrary to the State party’s argument that the author failed to exhaust all domestic remedies, the Committee noted that the author’s supervisory review complaint before the Presidium of the Supreme Court had been rejected. The Committee noted that the statistical information provided by the State party in substantiation of its argument that the supervisory review before the Presidium was an effective domestic remedy to be exhausted was very general and did not reflect the number of extradition cases involving allegations of a risk of torture and ill-treatment. The Committee held that it was not precluded from examining the present communication under article 5 (2) (b) of the Optional Protocol. Furthermore, the Committee held that the author had sufficiently substantiated his claims under article7 and hence declared the communication as admissible.

Merits

The Committee referred to its General Comment No. 31 regarding expulsion of persons from its territory when there are substantial grounds to believe that the person may be subject to a real risk of irreparable harm. The Committee also noted the weight to be given to the State party’s assessment regarding such expulsion. In furtherance of this, the Committee believed the State party took reasonable measures to verify the alleged risks posed to the author and also noted the lack of clarity and inconsistency on behalf of the author in his claims that his case was tried arbitrarily by the domestic authorities. The Committee held that despite there being no monitoring system to ensure the effective implementations of Azerbaijan’s assurances with respect to the author, the information and risk assessment made by the State party do not show that there was any real risk of treatment contrary to article 7 to the author on his extradition. However, the Committee was of the view that the extradition of the author pending the Committee’s consideration of his communication was in contradiction of the Committee’s request for interim measures of protection which was a violation by the State party of its obligations under article 1 of the Optional Protocol.

Recommendations

State party is obliged to avoid violations of article 1 of the Optional Protocol in the future and to comply with requests of the Committee for interim measures and to ensure that authors are not removed from the State party’s jurisdiction when their respective cases are under consideration by the Committee.

Implementation

Deadline for implementation: 4 January 2024