The European Court of Human Rights recently declined to hear an unlawful detention claim against Italy by a Tunisian national, citing the applicant’s failure to exhaust available domestic remedies. This decision aligns with the court’s established requirement that applicants must pursue all effective domestic options before escalating to the European court. The applicant, who had been temporarily residing in Italy under a work permit expiring in 2016, claimed a violation of his right to liberty as protected under Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The individual challenged that he was detained arbitrarily on the Italian cruise ship, Splendid, after attempting to re-enter Italy without an entry visa. According to his claim, he was confined for a week in a cabin with restricted egress, thus breaching his fundamental right to liberty. However, the Italian government and shipowners dispute these claims, contending that the applicant was not confined unlawfully.
Despite rejecting the case, the court indicated that had domestic remedies been exhausted, it might have considered the claim against Italy. The court acknowledged the ship’s Italian jurisdiction under maritime law and recognized the possibility that the captain was acting as a representative of the state when enforcing the return order. Importantly, the court concluded that the remedies proposed by the Italian government were effective, either offering a prospect of release or post-event compensation.
This recent decision echoes an earlier case in 2015 when the court ruled against Italy in a similar situation involving Tunisian nationals. At that time, Italy was found to have breached Article 5 due to the arbitrary detention of individuals without legal grounding in domestic law. The full details of the case and the court’s reasoning are available on the JURIST website here.