Strategic litigation, searchable.

CASE OF D.M. v. SWEDEN (no. 32694/23)

Whether the applicant's expulsion to Afghanistan would expose him to a real risk of treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture under Article 3.

CASE OF J.B. v. GREECE (no. 54796/16)

Whether the applicant's expulsion from Greece would expose him to a real risk of treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3.

J.B. v. Greece

Whether the applicant's expulsion from Greece would expose him to a real risk of treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture.

CASE OF KOVALENKO v. UKRAINE

Whether the applicant was subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment and whether the authorities conducted an effective investigation, contrary to the prohibition of torture.

Productivity Commission ROGS 2026 — Youth Justice Cost Analysis

Cost comparison: detention vs community supervision

B.M. v. Switzerland

Whether the applicant’s detention after conviction was lawful and whether the applicant received an effective judicial review of that detention under the right to liberty and security.

CASE OF PETRIGNANI AND OTHERS v. ITALY

Whether the applicants' criminal convictions and the subsequent confiscation of their property breached the principle of no punishment without law and the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.

ACT Raises Age of Criminal Responsibility to 14

First Australian jurisdiction to raise minimum age to 14 (July 2025). Evidence from health, neuroscience, and human rights.

ROGS Youth Justice - Productivity Commission Annual

Annual national benchmarking: $644M nationally, 66% detention vs 30% community. 734 children detained. Indigenous 23x overrepresented.

CASE OF KUNSHUGAROV v. TÜRKİYE (no. 60811/15)

Whether Turkey's extradition of the applicant to a country where he faced a real risk of torture and the conditions of his detention violated the prohibition of torture and the right to liberty.

CASE OF A.B. AND Y.W. v. MALTA (no. 2559/23)

Whether the applicants’ removal to China would expose them to a real risk of treatment prohibited by Article 3 (the absolute prohibition of torture).

CASE OF H.T. v. GERMANY AND GREECE (no. 13337/19)

Whether the applicant's treatment and expulsion would expose him to a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment, thus violating the prohibition of torture

Commission of Inquiry into Tasmania's Government Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (2024)

Decades of abuse at Ashley Youth Detention Centre

Victorian Youth Justice Bill 2024

Raising minimum age to 12 then 14

NSW Youth Justice Blueprint (2024)

State-wide youth justice reform strategy

CASE OF M.H. AND S.B. v. HUNGARY (no. 10940/17)

Whether the applicants' arrest and detention were lawful under the right to liberty and security.

CASE OF K.J. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (no. 27584/20)

Whether the applicants' expulsion to North Korea would expose them to a real risk of death or torture, violating their right to life and the prohibition of inhuman treatment, and whether their pre‑expulsion detention in Russia complied with the right to liberty and security.

CASE OF M.D. AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (no. 60778/19)

Whether the applicants' removal by Hungarian authorities constituted a collective expulsion of aliens in breach of the prohibition under Article 4 of Protocol No. 4

Tasmania Ashley Youth Detention Centre Closure 2024

AIHW Youth Justice in Australia Annual Report

Annual statistical report: 4,300+ young people in youth justice on any given day. Aboriginal children 14x more likely under supervision. 85% male.