A/HRC/50/31 D. 1. Accountability for pushbacks Promising developments at national and regional institutions and courts 57. The Special Rapporteur notes some recent and promising developments at national and regional institutions and courts regarding the accountability of State authorities and other actors for pushback practices. 58. In Austria, a provincial administrative court found in July 2021 that pushbacks were being carried out routinely by the Austrian authorities, in breach of the prohibition of refoulement. The court also established that the Slovenian authorities had effectively participated in chain refoulement through the take-back and onward transfer of migrants to Croatia, and subsequently to Bosnia and Herzegovina. 110 The same court also found the Austrian police authorities in violation of their obligations in relation to the unlawful return to Slovenia of a Somali national who had expressed the intention to claim asylum at a local police station in Austria.111 59. In Slovenia, justice for chain refoulement has been served in one notable case, in which the Supreme Court sanctioned the pushback of a Cameroonian national, who was unlawfully returned from Slovenia to Croatia, and ultimately to Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Supreme Court ordered the Government of Slovenia to take steps to allow the asylum seeker to re-enter the country and apply for asylum.112 60. In July 2021, the European Court of Human Rights found that the swift return to Turkey of a Turkish journalist arrested at the border, who had expressed a wish to seek asylum and his fear of ill-treatment in the context of the 2016 coup d’état attempt, had been in breach of the prohibition of torture. The Court found that Bulgarian border police had failed to provide the applicant with the necessary procedural guarantees, such as the assistance of an interpreter or translator and information about his rights as an asylum seeker.113 61. In November 2021, the European Court of Human Rights found that the Croatian authorities had violated the prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens, among other rights violations. The case concerned an Afghan family of 14. The mother and six of her children were pushed back to Serbia by Croatian authorities in November 2017, outside of an official border post, and without an individualized assessment of their circumstances. The pushback ultimately led to the tragic death of one of the children, who was hit by a train while the group walked along a railway track at the border at night-time, following the pushback. In its judgment, the Court made reference to the large number of reports documenting pushbacks by Croatian authorities.114 62. In the case Shazad v. Hungary,115 the Court again found a violation of the prohibition of collective expulsion during the pushback of an individual to the external side of a Hungarian border fence, in the absence of an individualized assessment, without a formal decision being issued, and without the possibility to exercise the right to an effective remedy against removal. The Court also established that countries like Hungary, with an external Schengen border, were required to make available “genuine and effective access to means of legal entry”, in particular border procedures for those who arrived at the border. 110 111 112 113 114 115 14 See Regional Administrative Court of Styria, Judgment LVwG 20.3-2725/2020-86 of 1 July 2021, available at http://asyl.at/files/514/3_000686_jv_sig_xx.pdf (in German). Asylkoordination Österreich, “Schutzansuchen von verfolgtem minderjährigem Somali ignoriert” (Protection requests from persecuted Somali minor ignored), available at: https://www.asyl.at/de/info/presseaussendungen/gerichtbestaetigtillegalenpush-back/. See submission by the Human Rights Ombudsman of Slovenia. See also Supreme Court Judgment I Up 23/2021 of 9 April 2021, available at: http://sodnapraksa.si/?q=VS00045236&database[SOVS]=SOVS&_submit=i%C5%A1%C4%8Di&ro wsPerPage=20&page=0&id=2015081111448095 (in Slovenian). See D v. Bulgaria, application No. 29447/17, Judgment of 20 July 2021, available (in French only) at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-211366. See M. H. v. Croatia, applications Nos. 15670/18 and 43115/18, Judgment of 18 November 2021. Application No. 12625/17, Judgment of 8 July 2021.