Αποστομωτική ήταν η απάντηση του Υπουργείου Εσωτερικών της Κυπρούλας μας στα όσα τεκμηριωμένα με στοιχεία όνομα και επώνυμο καταγράφονται στην λεπτομερέστατη 36σέλιδη έκθεση της Διεθνούς Αμνηστίας
Εδώ ολόκληρο το ριπορτ σε pdf
από το Κυπριακό Πρακτορείο Ειδήσεων
Εδώ το απόσπασμα που αποστομώνει την Διεθνή Αμνηστία
«Παρόλα αυτά κρίνεται ότι πολλές από τις κατηγορίες οι οποίες καταγράφονται είναι αβάσιμες.»
σε ποια από όλες από τις καταγραφείσες πέραν πάσης αμφιβολίας περιπτώσεις αναφέρεστε;
Μήπως για αυτήν εδώ που ενώ το Ανώτατο Δικαστήριο στις 18/1/2011 εξέδωσε απόφαση με την οποία διατασσόταν το κράτος να απελευθερώση έναν αιτων άσυλο που κρατείτο παράνομα για 16!! μήνες στο μπλοκ 10 το κράτος απλά έγραψε στα …..παλιά του τα παπούτσια την απόφαση του Ανωτάτου Δικαστηρίου ως άλλη Χουντα δεν τον άφησε ελεύθερο και έπρεπε να κινηθεί γη και ουρανός για να αφεθεί ελεύθερος στις 16 Απριλίου 2011 3 μήνες μετά;
S. is a 32-year-old Tamil asylum-seeker from Sri Lanka. Even though he had applied for asylum, he spent in
total 16 months in Block 10 of Nicosia Central Prison pending deportation which could not be effected because
his asylum application was still being considered.
He arrived in Cyprus in 2007 to study hotel management and was residing legally on the island. In July 2009,
however, after he had heard no news of his family for months following the end of the decades-long conflict
between the government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, he became desperate for
information so decided to go to Paris where there is a large Tamil community.24 He had no visa for France so he
used someone else’s passport to try to leave Cyprus, but was arrested and detained. While awaiting trial, he
applied for asylum given his fears about what was happening to his community in Sri Lanka.
In court he admitted his mistake and was sentenced to three months in prison. After he served his sentence,
he was immediately taken to a detention centre to await deportation, even though his asylum application was
still being considered.
Thanks to a lawyer who assisted him without charging him, he managed to apply to the Supreme Court to be
freed. On 18 January 2011, the Supreme Court ruled that the length of his detention was unlawful and ordered
his release. However, immediately after the ruling, S. was rearrested and detained. He was finally released
three months after the Supreme Court order but no document explaining his legal status was given to him or
his lawyer. He told Amnesty International: “A police officer opened the door and told me, ‘go now, you are
free’.” S. has now applied to the Supreme Court for the annulment of the decision rejecting his asylum
application and remains free, awaiting the Court’s ruling.
Μήπως για αυτήν εδώ που ένας πακιστανός αιτών άσυλο κρατείτο παράνομα κατά παράβαση της οδηγίας 115/2008 και το Ανώτατο Δικαστήριο εξέδωσε απόφαση απελευθέρωσης του από την παράνομη κράτηση του στις 20/1/2011 αλλά αντί το κράτος να εκτελέσει την απόφαση του Ανωτάτου Δικαστηρίου ως άλλη Χούντα και πάλι όχι μόνο δεν τον άφησαν ελεύθερο αλλά τον απέλασαν την επόμενη μέρα με συνοπτικότατες διαδικασίες!!!! κατά κατάφωρη παραβίαση της Συνθήκης της Γενεύης για τους πρόσφυγες της οδηγίας 85/2005 και κάθε αρχή κράτους δικαίου
I. is a 25-year-old Pakistani national who arrived in Cyprus in January 2009 to study economics at university.
On 2 March 2010 he was arrested because his student visa had expired. He was taken to Block 10 of Nicosia
Central Prison to await deportation. No alternatives to detention were examined. Two weeks after he was
detained, on 16 March, he applied for asylum, saying that his life would be in danger in Pakistan because he
had filmed an execution by the Taliban.
I. was only handed the detention and deportation orders eight months into his detention. His asylum claim was
dismissed at first instance in May 2010 and after appeal in October 2010. On 16 November 2010 an attempt
to deport him failed because I. refused to board the plane.
On 29 December 2010 his lawyer filed a case to challenge the dismissal of the asylum claim before the
Supreme Court. However, the deportation was not suspended. On 14 January 2011 his lawyer submitted a
habeas corpus application before the Supreme Court to challenge the legality of the length of I.’s detention,
which by then totalled 10 months. On 20 January 2011 the Supreme Court found the length of his detention
unlawful and ordered his immediate release. However, the next day, and despite the fact that the case
challenging the decision to dismiss his asylum claim was still pending before the Supreme Court, I. was
deported to Pakistan.
K. fled her native Iran in 2003, leaving behind one of her two children, and arrived in Cyprus the following year.
On arrival, she immediately applied for asylum for herself and the daughter she had been able to travel with.
The application was rejected at initial stage and on appeal. In 2008, she married N, a recognized refugee in
Cyprus, and later that year the couple had a daughter. K. and N. were married in a mosque, but the authorities
do not recognize their marriage.
In August 2011, while K. was at a local market, the police arrested her and placed her immediately in
detention because her documents were not in order. No alternative to detention was considered. “No one
seemed to care that a three-year-old girl was waiting for me back home,’’ she said.
Amnesty International met her in November 2011 in Block 9 of Nicosia Central Prison, where she had spent
five months in total. She said: “My child she thinks her mother abandoned her and has many psychological
problems as a result of being separated from her mother. Nobody cares, nobody wants to help us.’’
K.’s older daughter is now 24 and has lived in Cyprus since she was 15. She speaks Greek and English but
she is scared to leave the house fearing that she will be arrested and detained like her mother. “She wants to
go to university,” her mother said, “but instead she is imprisoned in her own house’’.
In January 2012, the authorities released K. provisionally and gave her three months to get her papers in order
and re-marry N. in the town hall. However, town hall officials told her that she needed a valid passport. To
obtain one, the Iranian embassy requires a birth certificate which she cannot get in time. She also claims that
the authorities have her original birth certificate, handed to them when filed her asylum application, but so far
refuse to return it despite her lawyer’s efforts.
She said: “Last time I went to the immigration authorities they told me to not worry, they said that when my
conditional release period is over, they will detain me for another six months and then let me go again for
another three months. They think this is OK but it is not. What will happen to my kids?’’
When Amnesty International delegates met Z., an Iranian asylum-seeker whose claim had been dismissed, he
had already been detained for three months and before that had been detained for three consecutive years. In
April 2012, he remained in detention. The office of the Commissioner for Administration has repeatedly raised
concern over the lawfulness of Z.’s detention given that his deportation had not been feasible for the past
three years due to the lack of travel documents and the fact that, to date, there is no realistic prospect of
Μήπως για αυτήν που κρατούσαν μια μητέρα ενός 7χρονου κοριτσιού που του δημιούργησαν κυριολεκτικα΄ανεξίτηλα ψυχικά τραύματα υπό κράτηση παντελώς παράνομα!!!!!!!!
X. is evidently anxious due to the fact that it is unknown to her when her mother will
return home and why she is today detained. The absence of her mother appears to affect
her everyday life, her activities and in general the functioning of the family, resulting in
X. being overwhelmed by stress and agony for the future as well as melancholy , a
phenomenon that can seriously disturb the personality of a child.
Specialist’s assessment of the impact on a child whose mother had been detained for months in one of Cyprus’ detention
immigration facilities, in October 2011
N. is an asylum-seeker from Sri Lanka. She is married to another Sri Lankan asylum-seeker who lives in Cyprus
and they have submitted a family asylum application. They have an eight-year-old daughter.
In September 2011, N. was arrested without documents and detained in Block 9 of Nicosia Central Prison.
Michalis Paraskevas, her lawyer, told Amnesty International that despite his repeated requests, the authorities
did not provide him with the deportation and detention order, so in April he challenged the lawfulness of her
detention before the Supreme Court.
When Amnesty International met N. in December 2011, she was still in detention along with several other
women held pending deportation. She tearfully said: “What kind of country separates a mother from her child?
Yesterday it was her birthday. My daughter told me, ‘mama I miss you so much’.’’
N. was eventually released on 23 April 2012, one day before the scheduled Supreme Court hearing and after
seven months in detention.
O., a Sierra Leonean whose claim was dismissed, arrived in Cyprus in 2001 when he was around 30 years old.
Amnesty International delegates met him in the dingy and cramped Block 10 of Nicosia Central Prison, where
he showed them a folder marked “evidence”. He said: ‘’I prepared it in case someone showed up.’’
He explained that he had fled Sierra Leone as a result of events arising from the decade-long civil war in the
country. In 2004 the Cypriot authorities closed his file, saying that they could not locate him to examine his
application. He refutes that claim, saying that he was forced to change address and informed the authorities
A few months later, in February 2005, he was arrested. Over most of the next three years he was held in Block
10 during which four failed deportation attempts took place. In one of these attempts, in December 2005,
immigration officers escorted him to Ghana but the authorities there refused to allow them to proceed to Sierra
Leone due to lack of proper documentation.
Amnesty International had already met him in detention in 2007 and had written to the Cypriot authorities to
raise concern about the lawfulness and length of his detention. He was eventually released for the first time in
May 2008, after 39 months in continuous detention. He told Amnesty International that upon release he was
left destitute and without any legal status. “The guard just opened the doors and told me ‘go now’. No papers,
nothing. What was I supposed to do, where was I supposed to go?’’
He was eventually forced to take up work to survive and as a result was arrested again in October 2010 for
“illegal stay and employment” and again detained pending deportation. In August 2011, after he had been
detained for around 10 months, he challenged the lawfulness of his detention on the grounds of its protracted
length before the Supreme Court. He won and the court ordered his immediate release. However, before he left
the court premises he was arrested and detained once again. The new arrest order was dated one day before
the Supreme Court judgment was issued.
His faith in justice was shattered, he said. He added that when he arrived in Cyprus, “I was tricked by
smugglers to believe I was safely in a EU country [Cyprus only joined the EU in 2004]. For months I thought I
was in Greece. Now I have been tricked again, this time by the authorities. What is there left for me to do?
He was finally deported to Sierra Leone in January 2012, having spent in total more than four years in
detention in Cyprus.
B. is a 36-year-old Nigerian who arrived in Cyprus in 2005 and applied for asylum. His application was
rejected but he says that he was never interviewed. When Amnesty International met him in December 2011,
he had been detained in Block 10 for over four months and had no idea what would happen to him. He had
never seen a lawyer because he was unable to pay for one.
He told Amnesty International that his eyes were causing him problems and that his eyesight had seriously
deteriorated in detention. “My eyes swell up and I can’t sleep for days,’’ he said. “The doctor who comes here
says there is nothing he can do for me and sends me away. He only gives Panadol [a painkiller] to everyone
anyway – we call him Panadol doctor.’’67 B.’s documents show that he was taken to the hospital three times
but he claims it was only twice. He was diagnosed with a chronic problem but was only given eye drops “that
have no effect’’. He fears he will lose his sight.
“All the difficulties people experience here are 10 times worse for me because of my sight problems,’’ he said.
“It takes me 10 minutes to get to the toilet. It feels like torture.’’
A. comes from sub-Saharan Africa. When Amnesty International met him in Block 10 of Nicosia Central Prison
he had already been detained for more than a month pending deportation. After his asylum claim was rejected
in 2009, he was advised to pursue the case further but he said that he could not afford a lawyer.
A. has diabetes and said that since his detention he had lost a considerable amount of weight. “With the
nutrition here it is impossible to follow a proper diet,’’ he said. He also told Amnesty International that the
visiting doctor had never checked his blood sugar level. He has his own monitoring machine, but needs special
needles for it work. When they ran out, he asked for replacements, but the ones they brought him were not
compatible with his machine. “When I asked for proper needles I was mocked by the guards,’’ he said. “They
told me to pay for them myself but I have no money.”
Πόσος εξευτελισμός μαζεμένος σε αυτό το νησί που κατά τα άλλα επικαλείται παραβιάσεις ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων από την Τουρκία