003-7933040-11050341

issued by the Registrar of the Court   ECHR 099 (2024)   23.04.2024   Judgments of 23 April 2024   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing seven judgments1:   one Chamber judgment is summarised below;   separate press releases have been issued for three Chamber judgments in the cases of Sacharuk   v. Lithuania (application no. 39300/18), Zăicescu and Fălticineanu v. Romania (no. 42917/16), and   Aydın Sefa Akay v. Türkiye (no. 59/17);   three Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, can   be consulted on Hudoc and do not appear in this press release.   The judgment summarised below is available only in English.   M.B. v. the Netherlands (application no. 71008/16)   The applicant, Mr M.B., is a Syrian national who was born in 1997 and at the time of lodging his   application was being held in immigration detention in Rotterdam (the Netherlands).   The applicant entered the Netherlands in October 2015 and applied for asylum. He was arrested   shortly afterwards on suspicion of participation in a terrorist organisation and placed in pre-trial   detention. He was convicted to 10 months’ detention by a first-instance Court. He was released in   September 2016, but immediately placed in immigration detention pending the assessment of his   asylum application. The case concerns the decision to order the applicant’s immigration detention   on the ground that he posed a threat to public order.   Relying on Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security) of the European Convention on Human Rights,   Mr M.B. alleges that this decision was unlawful and arbitrary.   Violation of Article 5 § 1   Just satisfaction:   non-pecuniary damage: 4,560 euros (EUR)   This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions,   judgments and further information about the Court can be found on www.echr.coe.int. To receive   the Court’s press releases, please subscribe here: www.echr.coe.int/RSS/en or follow us on Twitter   @ECHR_CEDH.   Press contacts   [email protected]e.int | tel.: +33 3 90 21 42 08   We are happy to receive journalists’ enquiries via either email or telephone.   Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel.: + 33 3 88 41 35 30)   Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber   judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a   panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and   deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the   Convention, judgments delivered by a Committee are final.   Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.   Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution   Denis Lambert (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 41 09)   Inci Ertekin (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 55 30)   Neil Connolly (tel.: + 33 3 90 21 48 05)   Jane Swift (tel.: + 33 3 88 41 29 04)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe member   States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.   2