News

On 28 July 2022, the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania (SACL) issued a ruling regarding the legitimacy of detention of foreigner who unlawfully entered the Republic of Lithuania. The Court had previously referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling. SACL took CJEU‘s interpretations into account whilst forming crucial administrative court case law in this area.

An expanded panel of judges examined the third-country national‘s appeal in which he contested a District Court‘s judgement for warranting a three-month detention. Questions arose to the panel of judges at SACL regarding the proper interpretation of European Union acts concerning reception of applications for international protection (Directives 2013/32/EU and 2013/33/EU of 26 June 2013). CJEU eliminated the ambiguities of the legal acts in the Judgment of the Court of 30 June 2022 (Case no. C-72/22 PPU)

SACL examined whether the applicant can be qualified as an asylum seeker if the application had not been completed in accordance with the national law, as this had an effect on the grounds for detention and scope of human rights of the applicant.

The Court took into account CJEU‘s clarification that international protection may be obtained by completing an application whereas further administrative formalities are not required. To do so, the international protection seeker shall fill out the form set in relevant directive.

Moreover, the Court emphasized that any third-country national or stateless person has the right to make an application for international protection on the territory of a Member State, including at its borders or in its transit zones, even if they are staying unlawfully in that Member State, as explained in the CJEU preliminary ruling. The extended panel of judges stressed that the State retains the right to demand applications to be filled out in person and/or at a required place but it cannot utilise this right to hinder or rush the application process for the foreign nationals. This also applies to cases during a state of emergency due to a mass influx of foreigners.

The case material showed that the Applicant submitted the application, nevertheless containing formal deficiencies non-compliant with national legal acts, therefore it can be considered that the applicant obtained the status of an asylum seeker by European Union law standards.

Whilst assessing the legitimacy of detention grounds, SACL stated that having regard to EU law standards, the fact that an applicant for international protection is staying in the territory of a Member State illegally does not justify detention. Consequently, a third-country national cannot be detained on that basis alone.

According to the Court, an emergency declaration due to a mass influx of foreigners does not automatically justify detention of asylum seeker on the grounds that national security or public order is threatened. Additionally, the Court pointed out that the threat to national security or public order can justify the detention of an applicant only if the applicant’s individual conduct represents a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society or the internal or external security of the Member State concerned. In assessing this, the Court stated that no circumstance was identified which would establish the necessity to detain the applicant on the grounds that the foreigner‘s behaviour poses a threat to previously mentioned values.

As a final remark on the conclusions presented in the Decision, the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania established that the court of first instance wrongly evaluated the case matter in the context of EU and national law therefore issuing an unlawful decision to detain the Applicant.

Administrative case No. A-1091-822/2022.