Extradition to Russia despite a risk of torture and a pending asylum claim

Facts

The author, Aslan Achmetovič Jandiev, is a Russian national of Ingush ethnicity and Muslim faith who was accused of involvement in terrorism-related crimes in North Ossetia–Alania. He claimed that the charges were politically motivated due to his ethnicity and religious background and that he had been arbitrarily detained and tortured by Russian authorities between 2005 and 2007 as part of counterterrorism operations in Ingushetia. In 2006, after one such detention, he was hospitalized for a concussion caused by police beatings. Fearing further persecution, the author left Russia in 2008, travelling through Ukraine, Slovakia, Czechia, and Germany before being returned to Slovakia, where he applied for asylum under a false identity.

His initial asylum claim was rejected in 2010 by the Belgian authorities, and after being returned to Slovakia, he filed a second asylum application with his real name. The Slovak Migration Office rejected his asylum claim five times, with each decision annulled by domestic courts. Meanwhile, Russia requested his extradition in 2011, providing several diplomatic assurances that he would not be tortured and would receive a fair trial. Despite that, on appeal in 2017, the Slovak Supreme Court found that the author faced a foreseeable, real, and personal risk of torture in Russia questioning the reliability of these diplomatic assurances. They further noted that, since he had unsuccessfully sought international protection, the probability of him being further exposed to torture had increased. In 2016, however, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that there were no substantial grounds to believe that his extradition would expose him to a real risk of torture, as Russia had been seen to respect guarantees in similar instances. In 2018, then, the Minister of Justice approved his extradition and the Slovak Constitutional Court, relying on ECtHR decision, upheld the action to allow extradition. Notably, on 21 June 2018, the Committee had issued a request for interim measures, instructing Slovakia to refrain from extraditing the author while it reviewed his case. The Committee had reiterated this request on 13 July 2018. However, on 17 July 2018, Slovakia proceeded with the extradition, sending the author to Russia where he was detained.

The author claims that his extradition violated article 7 of the Covenant, as he faced a credible risk of torture, and that Slovakia’s failure to comply with the interim measures further constitutes a serious violation of its obligations under the Covenant and the Optional Protocol.

Admissibility

The Committee found the author to have exhausted all effective domestic remedies therefore finding the communication admissible under article  5 (2) (b). It rejected Slovakia’s argument that the case was inadmissible due to res judicata, as new factual circumstances had emerged since the 2016 ECtHR ruling, including the Supreme Court’s finding of a real risk of torture and Slovakia’s failure to respect interim measures. The Committee also declared the claims under article 7, read with article 2 (3), as sufficiently substantiated and accordingly admissible.

Merits

The Committee found that Slovakia violated article 7 of the Covenant by extraditing the author while his asylum proceedings were still pending, and despite clear evidence of a foreseeable, real, and personal risk of torture in Russia. It emphasised that Slovakia’s reliance on diplomatic assurances from Russia were insufficient, given consistent reports of torture, especially against terrorism suspects, and that the lack of an individual risk assessment before extradition breached the State party’s obligations under the Covenant. The Committee further determined that Slovakia’s failure to comply with the interim measures by them constituted a serious violation of the Optional Protocol, undermining their ability to review the case effectively as well as denying the author the full protection of his rights under the Covenant.

Recommendations

The State party should:

• (a) take steps to verify the author’s current status and ensure continued monitoring of his detention conditions in Russia;
• (b) provide adequate compensation to the author for the violation of his rights;
• (c) implement safeguards to prevent similar violations in future extradition and asylum cases.

Implementation

Deadline for implementation: 16 January 2025