The Third ECtHR Judgment Confirming that Croatia Violates Refugees’ Human Rights Becomes Final – Justice Won for Yilmaz, and a Landmark Decision for Many Other Victims of Pushbacks in Croatia

The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in the case Y.K. v. Croatia, which found that the Republic of Croatia violated the rights of Turkish national of Kurdish origin, Yilmaz Kökbalik, has now become final. This decision confirms what the Centre for Peace Studies and other organisations have been warning about for years: Croatia systematically and unlawfully expels refugees, denying them the right to asylum, legal representation, and access to justice.

Kökbalik came to Croatia seeking protection from the political persecution and torture he had suffered in Turkey. Instead of safety, the authorities detained him, prevented him from applying for international protection, and expelled him, thereby exposing him to the risk of renewed torture and even death. The Court clearly found that Croatia had violated the prohibition of torture and the right to an effective remedy. This is already the third ECtHR judgment confirming that Croatia has violated refugees’ human rights.

This ruling is particularly important for all those who have been or will be victims of unlawful expulsions. In its judgment, the Court emphasised several key points:

Firstly, the Court confirmed that persons who do not speak Croatian or understand the legal system cannot effectively challenge an expulsion order before a court without legal representation. The majority of refugees expelled from Croatia in the past nine years - often violently and without any formal procedure - were in exactly this position, similar to the case of M.H. v. Croatia, in which little Madina Hussiny and her family were expelled. The same applies to refugees and migrants held in detention who are denied access to a lawyer and/or the asylum system.

Secondly, even if Kökbalik had filed a complaint against the expulsion order, it would not have allowed him to remain in Croatia until a final court decision. None of the legal remedies cited by the Government had an automatic suspensive effect - a necessary condition for effectiveness in such cases. Although the law has since been amended, in practice, many people who are unlawfully expelled do not receive a decision, or, if they do, they have no access to a lawyer. Therefore, all the conclusions from this judgment remain equally relevant for current practices and cases at Croatia’s borders.

Thirdly, the Court stressed that neither an appeal to the Constitutional Court to suspend an expulsion order nor a constitutional complaint would have automatic suspensive effect, as such decisions are usually issued months after the application is submitted. The Court thus clearly refuted the Government’s previous claims that a constitutional complaint constitutes an effective legal remedy, showing that it is insufficient to safeguard the rights of those facing expulsion.

This judgment is a victory for justice and proof that systematic human rights violations can and must be challenged. The Centre for Peace Studies calls on the competent authorities to end the practice of unlawful expulsions, ensure access to asylum, legal assistance and effective remedies, and implement systemic changes that protect human dignity. The final judgment in Yilmaz Kökbalik’s case demonstrates that justice can be achieved through persistence and courage, even in the face of rigid systems - offering both hope and guidance to victims and their lawyers seeking to protect their rights before the Court.