CEDH – Arrêt du 31 août 2023 – M.A v. Italy (n°70583/17) – Violation de l’art. 3 de la CESDH – Placement d’une mineure non accompagnée en centre d’accueil pour adultes

Résumé :

Saisie par une requérante de nationalité ghanéenne accueillie plusieurs mois au sein d’un centre d’accueil pour adultes en Italie durant sa minorité, la Cour européenne des droits de l’Homme conclut à une violation de l’article 3 de la CESDH (droit à ne pas être soumis à des traitements inhumains et dégradants).

La requérante avait passé près de huit mois dans ce centre d’accueil pour adultes et avait été transférée dans un centre adapté à l’accueil de mineur.es uniquement suite à l’application d’une mesure provisoire (art 39 du règlement de la Cour) indiquée par la CEDH. Ses demandes de transfert précédentes étaient restées sans réponse malgré sa vulnérabilité particulière au regard de sa minorité et des abus sexuels dont elle avait été victime au Ghana, puis en Libye.

Extraits de l’arrêt :

« […].

41. Be that as it may, the Court observes that, shortly after her arrival in the Osvaldo Cappelletti centre, the applicant had disclosed being a victim of sexual abuse, both in Ghana and in Libya (see paragraph 13 above). She then reiterated her claims by her statements of 31 May 2017 to the psychologist and mediator who looked after her. It was thus known to the authorities that she was particularly vulnerable. Besides, the police headquarters had been made acquainted with the applicant’s declarations in this respect by 29 June 2017 at the latest, in the framework of the applicant’s asylum request.

42. In this context, it is worth noting that between 28 June 2017 and 3 August 2017, the applicant’s representative addressed four requests to the Prefecture, the police headquarters and the Red Cross asking that the applicant be transferred to a suitable centre (see paragraphs 16 and 20 above) which could have alleviated her fragile conditions.

43. Moreover, on 11 September 2017, the applicant’s representative reiterated her plea to the applicant’s guardian, underlying the need to protect her client’s fundamental rights.

44. Nonetheless, all these requests went unanswered, and the applicant’s situation remained unchanged until the end of September 2017, when the Court decided to apply an interim measure pursuant to Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, indicating to the Government the need to transfer her to facilities where appropriate conditions for her as an unaccompanied minor could be ensured.

45. As a consequence, the applicant remained in an adult centre for a considerable period of time, until October 2017, thus not benefiting from the accommodation and assistance that her vulnerable situation required.

46. The Court would also emphasise that, although two guardians were appointed for the applicant during her stay in the Osvaldo Cappelletti centre (the first shortly after her arrival in the centre in February 2017 and the second on 6 July 2017), both guardians have proven to be unresponsive to the applicant’s situation and needs.

47. The Court notes that the psychological implications of the applicant’s traumatic experience are clearly stated in the report of 4 October 2017 of the psychological assistance organisation working in the centre where the applicant was accommodated (see paragraph 23 above).

48. In the light of the foregoing, the Court considers that the applicant’s treatment attained the minimum level of severity to fall within the scope of Article 3. It then concludes that the applicant’s continued stay in the Osvaldo Cappelletti centre, which was apparently not equipped to provide the applicant with appropriate psychological assistance, taken together with the national authorities’ prolonged inaction regarding her situation and needs as a particularly vulnerable minor, amounted to a breach of her right not to be subjected to inhuman treatment, as protected by Article 3 of the Convention.

[…]  »

Voir l’arrêt de la CEDH au format PDF :

CEDH – Arrêt du 31 août 2023 – M.A v. Italy (n°70583/17)
Retour en haut de page