This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/14/world/europe/france-isis-families.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Top European Court Condemns France for Failing to Bring Home ISIS Families Top European Court Condemns France Over Refusal to Bring Home ISIS Families
(about 2 hours later)
PARIS — Europe’s top human rights court condemned the French government on Wednesday for failing to bring home the families of two Islamic State fighters, a landmark ruling that may push France and other European countries to speed up the repatriation of nationals held for years in squalid detention camps in northeastern Syria. PARIS — Europe’s top human rights court condemned the French government on Wednesday over its refusal to bring home the families of two Islamic State fighters, a landmark ruling that may push France and other European countries to speed up the repatriation of nationals held for years in squalid detention camps in northeastern Syria.
In a statement, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights ruled that there had been a violation of the family members’ right to return home, adding that “the French government would be expected to promptly re-examine” the families’ request to be repatriated and “afford them appropriate safeguards against any arbitrariness.”In a statement, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights ruled that there had been a violation of the family members’ right to return home, adding that “the French government would be expected to promptly re-examine” the families’ request to be repatriated and “afford them appropriate safeguards against any arbitrariness.”
The decision was the first time that the court had ruled on the repatriation of European families who joined the Islamic State and have been held in Syrian camps run by Kurdish forces since 2019, when the extremist group collapsed. Hundreds of family members remain in the camps, presenting a thorny issue to European countries that are torn between their reluctance to bring back individuals associated with traumatic years of terrorism and their commitment to human rights.The decision was the first time that the court had ruled on the repatriation of European families who joined the Islamic State and have been held in Syrian camps run by Kurdish forces since 2019, when the extremist group collapsed. Hundreds of family members remain in the camps, presenting a thorny issue to European countries that are torn between their reluctance to bring back individuals associated with traumatic years of terrorism and their commitment to human rights.
Although the court did not require France to repatriate the two families and did not issue a general obligation to bring home all its nationals, the fact that it found the country to be in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights may prompt France and other European nations to accelerate the repatriation process to avoid future embarrassing legal challenges.Although the court did not require France to repatriate the two families and did not issue a general obligation to bring home all its nationals, the fact that it found the country to be in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights may prompt France and other European nations to accelerate the repatriation process to avoid future embarrassing legal challenges.
“The judgment could increase pressure on other European countries to repatriate more nationals from northeast Syria, as the court’s findings apply to all state parties” to the convention, said Letta Tayler, a senior counterterrorism researcher at Human Rights Watch.“The judgment could increase pressure on other European countries to repatriate more nationals from northeast Syria, as the court’s findings apply to all state parties” to the convention, said Letta Tayler, a senior counterterrorism researcher at Human Rights Watch.
The decision came two months after France brought home 16 wives of jihadists for the first time, along with 35 children, in an apparent break with its longstanding policy of not repatriating adults and of applying a case-by-case approach to the return of children.The decision came two months after France brought home 16 wives of jihadists for the first time, along with 35 children, in an apparent break with its longstanding policy of not repatriating adults and of applying a case-by-case approach to the return of children.
But it has remained unclear whether the country will quickly follow suit by returning the roughly 165 children and 65 women of French nationality who are still stranded in the fetid, disease-ridden detainment camps.But it has remained unclear whether the country will quickly follow suit by returning the roughly 165 children and 65 women of French nationality who are still stranded in the fetid, disease-ridden detainment camps.
The French Foreign Ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The two mothers and their three children whose cases the court examined — and whose names were not disclosed in the legal proceedings — were not part of the latest repatriation operation, which took place on July 5. Their cases landed before the European court more than two years ago, after they were rejected by French courts.The two mothers and their three children whose cases the court examined — and whose names were not disclosed in the legal proceedings — were not part of the latest repatriation operation, which took place on July 5. Their cases landed before the European court more than two years ago, after they were rejected by French courts.
During the public hearing, held in September, the lawyer for the French government argued that it should not be obliged to repatriate, as it had no control or authority over its citizens in northeastern Syria. France was supported in its argument by seven other European countries, demonstrating the far-reaching nature of the case.During the public hearing, held in September, the lawyer for the French government argued that it should not be obliged to repatriate, as it had no control or authority over its citizens in northeastern Syria. France was supported in its argument by seven other European countries, demonstrating the far-reaching nature of the case.
But the court on Wednesday ruled that “there were special features which enabled France’s jurisdiction” over the family members, including that their lives were at risk, that several requests for repatriation had been sent to the French authorities and that Kurdish forces had long called for their return home. But the court on Wednesday ruled that “there were special features which enabled France’s jurisdiction” over the family members, including that their lives were at risk, that several requests for repatriation had been sent to the French authorities and that Kurdish forces had long called for their return home. It added that France had failed to properly examine the families’ requests for repatriation.
The French Foreign Ministry noted in a statement that the court did not force it “to proceed with the repatriation of the people held in northeast Syria, but only to re-examine these requests,” adding that new returns would be implemented when safety conditions are met.
Ms. Tayler said that the judgment was “a damning condemnation of France’s persistent efforts to evade responsibility for its nationals arbitrarily detained.”Ms. Tayler said that the judgment was “a damning condemnation of France’s persistent efforts to evade responsibility for its nationals arbitrarily detained.”
The decision was widely welcomed by lawyers, European lawmakers and even some victims of Islamist terrorism who have long denounced what they see as a violation of human rights.The decision was widely welcomed by lawyers, European lawmakers and even some victims of Islamist terrorism who have long denounced what they see as a violation of human rights.
“For several years now, and still at this very moment, women and children are literally dying in these camps,” Dunja Mijatovic, Europe’s commissioner for human rights, said at the public hearing of the case in September 2021. “Their repatriation is, in my opinion, the only way forward.”“For several years now, and still at this very moment, women and children are literally dying in these camps,” Dunja Mijatovic, Europe’s commissioner for human rights, said at the public hearing of the case in September 2021. “Their repatriation is, in my opinion, the only way forward.”
Ms. Tayler said that the judgment should be “a wake-up call to European countries that they are flouting the law by abandoning their nationals to horrific conditions.”Ms. Tayler said that the judgment should be “a wake-up call to European countries that they are flouting the law by abandoning their nationals to horrific conditions.”
Recognizing the dismal security and living conditions in the camps, countries like Belgium and Germany have recently engaged in large-scale repatriations.Recognizing the dismal security and living conditions in the camps, countries like Belgium and Germany have recently engaged in large-scale repatriations.
But given the terrorism-related trauma in France, repatriating Islamic State families en masse carries a political risk that President Emmanuel Macron had long seemed unwilling to take. His government’s move to toughen its legislation against radical Islamism and expel an imam considered extremist seemed to signal a hardening of that stance.But given the terrorism-related trauma in France, repatriating Islamic State families en masse carries a political risk that President Emmanuel Macron had long seemed unwilling to take. His government’s move to toughen its legislation against radical Islamism and expel an imam considered extremist seemed to signal a hardening of that stance.
But French security experts and counterterrorism judges have also argued that leaving nationals in the camps incurs greater risks than bringing them home, because they could join a resurgent Islamic State in the region.But French security experts and counterterrorism judges have also argued that leaving nationals in the camps incurs greater risks than bringing them home, because they could join a resurgent Islamic State in the region.
And as France has been going through high-profile trials of terrorist attacks that scarred the country in 2015 and 2016, repatriating the women could also help criminal investigations by providing new testimonies. On Wednesday, the French radio station RMC revealed that the widow of one of the assailants in the Bataclan attack had been brought back to France as part of the July repatriation — less than a week after the trial of the attack ended.And as France has been going through high-profile trials of terrorist attacks that scarred the country in 2015 and 2016, repatriating the women could also help criminal investigations by providing new testimonies. On Wednesday, the French radio station RMC revealed that the widow of one of the assailants in the Bataclan attack had been brought back to France as part of the July repatriation — less than a week after the trial of the attack ended.