LJUDSКA PRAVA STRANACA KOJIMA JE ODBIJEN ULAZAK I KOJI SU PRITVORENI U TRANZITNOJ ZONI AERODROMA: OD SAGE NOVAКA ĐOКOVIĆA DO ARBITRARNOG PRITVARANJA H. G. D.
Abstract
Pravo na slobodu i bezbednost ličnosti, kao i apsolutno pravo pojedinca
da ne bude zlostavljan ili proteran na teritoriju države u kojoj bi se
suočio sa takvim rizikom, predstavljaju kamen temeljac zaštite izbeglica i
migranata na svim graničnim prelazima. Međutim, bez obzira na migracioni
status stranca koji dolazi na granične kontrolne punktove, čitav obim
ljudskih prava štiti pojedinca od službenika granične policije koji vrše
suverenitet države prilikom kontrolisanja ulaska, boravka ili proterivanja
stranaca sa njene teritorije. Ovo neosporno pravo države nije apsolutno i
mora se sprovoditi u skladu sa međunarodnim pravom ljudskih prava, ali
i međunarodnim izbegličkim pravom. Inspirisan slučajem Novaka Đokovića,
ovaj članak se bavi pravnim statusom stranaca kojima je odbijen ulazak
na teritoriju određene zemlje i koji su zadržani u tranzitnim zonama
aerodroma. Praksa na beogradskom aerodromu služi kao studija slučaja.
Status stranaca u tranzitnoj zoni aerodroma „Nikola Tesla” sagledan je iz
ugla prava na slobodu i bezbednost ličnosti i standarda koji su proizašli iz
prakse Evropskog suda za ljudska prava.
References
Bibliography
1. Beširević, V., Papić, T., Immigration and Integration by Adjudication in Europe:
State Sovereignty under Challenge, in: Varady, T., (ed.), 2017, Migrants in 21st
Century Europe, Belgrade, Serbian Academy of Science and Art (SANU).
2. Beširević, V., 2020, Constitutional Court of the Republic of Serbia (Ustavni sud
Republike Srbije), in: Grote, R., Lachenmann, F., Wolfrum, R., (eds.), 2021, Max
Planck Encyclopedia of Comparative Constitutional Law, Oxford, Oxford University
Press.
3. CoE, Guide on Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights: Right to
Liberty and Security, Updated on 31 December 2021.
4. Costello, C., 2017, Article 31 of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees,
UNHCR – Division of International Protection.
5. Flynn, M., 2015, Who Must Be Detained? Proportionality as a Tool for Critiquing
Immigration Detention Policy, Refugee Survey Quarterly, University of Manitoba.
6. Frigo, M., 2021, Migration and International Human Rights Law A Practitioners’
Guide, Third Edition, International Commission of Jurists.
7. Hathaway, J., 2005, The Rights of Refugees under International Law, Cambridge
University Press.
8. Higgins, A., 2022, Novak Djokovic Through Australia’s Pandemic Looking Glass:
Denied Natural Justice, Faulted by Open Justice and Failed by a Legal System
Unable to Stop the Arbitrary use of State Power – Djokovic v Minister for Immigration
[2022] FCAFC 3, Civil Justice Quarterly.
9. Kilibarda, P., Kovačević, N., 2017, Country Report: Serbia, ECRE.
10. Kovačević, N., 2021, Country Report: Serbia-2021 Update, ECRE.
11. Krstić, I., Davinić, M., 2013, Pravo na azil – međunarodni i domaći standardi,
Beograd, Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu – Centar za izdavaštvo i informisanje.
12. Krstić, I., Marinković, T., 2016, Evropsko pravo ljudskih prava, Council of Europe.
13. Lindley, A., 2022, ‘Hit and Miss’? Access to Legal Assistance in Immigration Detention,
Journal of Human Rights Practice.
14. Macken, C., 2006, Preventive Detention and the Right to Personal Liberty and
Security under Article 5 ECHR, The International Journal of Human Rights, Vol.
10, No. 3.
15. Moreno Lax, V., 2008, Must EU Borders Have Doors for Refugees? On the Compatibility
of Schengen Visas with EU Member States’ Obligations to Provide International
Protection to Refugees, CRIDHO Working Paper 2008/03.
16. Peers, S., Immigration and Asylum, in: Bernard, C., Peers, S., (eds.), 2017, European
Union Law, Oxford University Press.
17. Schutter, O. de, 2010, International Human Rights Law: Cases, Materials, Commentary,
Cambridge University Press.
18. Wilde, R., The Extraterritorial Application of International Human Rights Law
on Civil and Political Rights, in: Sheeran, S., Rodley, Sir N., (eds.), 2013, Routledge
Handbook of International Human Rights Law, Routledge.
19. Wouters, C., International Refugee and Human Rights Law: Partners in Ensuring
International Protection and Asylum, in: Sheeran, S., Rodley, Sir N., (eds.), 2013,
Routledge Handbook of International Human Rights Law, Routledge.
Legislative Sources
1. Council of Europe, European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14, 4 November
1950, ETS 5.
2. UNGA, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966,
United Nations, Treaty Series, Vol. 999.
3. Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia,
nos. 98/06 and 115/21.
4. Law on Asylum, Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, no. 109/07, Art. 35.
5. Law on Foreigners, Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, no. 97/08.
6. Rulebook on House Rules and Rules of Stay in the Detention Center for Foreigners
of the Republic of Serbia, Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, no. 42/18.
Case Law
1. A. M. v. France, no. 56324/13, Judgment of 12 July 2016.
2. Amuur v. France, no. 19776/92, Judgment of 25 June 1996.
3. Berrehab v. the Netherlands, no. 10730/84, Judgment of 21 June 1988.
4. Creangă v. Romania, no. 29226/03, Judgment of 23 February 2012.
5. Čonka v. Belgium, no. 51564/99, Judgment of 5 February 2002.
6. De Tomasso v. Italy, no. 43395/09, Judgment of 23 February 2017.
7. Fox, Campbell and Hartley v. the United Kingdom, nos. 12244/86, 12245/86,
12383/86, Judgment of 30 August 1990.
8. Gillan and Quinton v. The United Kingdom, no. 4158/05, Judgment of 12 January
2010.
9. Guzzardi v. Italy, no. 7367/76, Judgment of 6 November 1980.
10. H.G.D. v. Serbia, no. 3158/20, Communicated on 12 July 2021.
11. Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary, no. 47287/15, Judgment of 21 November 2019 [GC].
12. J. N. v. the United Kingdom, no. 38289/12, Judgment of 19 May 2016.
13. Khlaifia and Others v. Italy, no. 16483/12, Judgment of 15 December 2016.
14. Khudoyorov v. Russia, no. 6847/02, Judgment of 8 November 2005.
15. Moustahi v. France, no. 9347/14, Judgment of 25 June 2020.
16. Nolan and K. v. Russia, no. 2512/04, Judgment of 6 July 2009.
17. Plesó v. Hungary, no. 4 1242/08, Judgment of 2 October 2012.
18. S., V. and A. v. Denmark, nos. 35553/12, 36678/12, 36711/12, Judgment of 22
October 2018.
19. Saadi v. the United Kingdom, no. 13229/03, Judgment of 29 January 2008.
20. Slivenko v. Latvia, no. 48321/99, Judgment of 9 October 2010 [GC], para. 159.
21. Stašaitis v. Lithuania, no. 47679/99, Judgment of 21 March 2002.
22. Z. A. and Others v. Russia, nos. 61411/15, 61420/15, 61427/15 and 3028/16,
Judgment of 21 November 2019 [GC].
Internet Sources
1. Kovačević, N., 2022, Novak Djokovic, X. and Y., Peščanik, (https://bit.ly/3MG-
3vHB).
2. Lazarus, L., 2016, The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
decision on Assange: ‘ridiculous’ or ‘justifiable’?, EJIL: TALK, (https://bit.
ly/39tud8a).
3. Pijnenburg, A., 2017, Is N.D. and N.T. v. Spain the new Hirsi?, EJIL:TALK,
(https://bit.ly/3EZGBZf).
4. Stoyanova, V., 2019, The Grand Chamber Judgment in Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary:
Immigration Detention and How the Ground Beneath Our Feet Continues
to Erode, Strasbourg Observers, (https://bit.ly/3OOzB5L).
Other Sources
1. CAT, Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Serbia * *, 3 June
2015, UN Doc. CAT/C/SRB/CO/2*.
2. CPT, Immigration detention, Factsheet, March 2017, CoE Doc. CPT/Inf(2017)3.
3. CPT, Foreign nationals detained under aliens’ legislation, CoE Doc. CPT/Inf(
97)10-part.
4. Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 31, The Nature of the General
Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant, 26 May 2004, UN doc.
CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.13.
5. Human Rights Committee, General comment No. 35 Article 9 (Liberty and security
of person) *, 16 December 2014, UN Doc. CCPR/C/GC/35.
6. Special Rapporteur on Torture, Visit to Serbia and Kosovo*, 25 January 2019, UN
Doc. A/HRC/40/59/Add.1.
7. Working group on Arbitrary Detention, Report of the Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention, 24 December 2011, UN Doc. A/HRC/22/44.
8. WGA, Opinion No. 54/2015 concerning Julian Assange (Sweden and the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), 22 January 2016, A/HRC/
WGAD/2015.