The Supreme Court has confirmed that the return of Moroccan minors from Ceuta to Morocco carried out by the Spanish authorities in August 2021 was illegal due to the “absolute non-observance” of the requirements of the Immigration Law, which require an individual administrative procedure. information about the situation of each affected person, hearing them if they are mature and intervention of the Public Prosecutor's Office.
The Administrative Litigation Chamber, in agreement with the Prosecutor's Office, confirms that the rights to physical and moral integrity of the minors returned to Morocco were violated. According to the ruling, it cannot be denied that in this case he put himself in serious danger of suffering from a physical or mental illness as a minor.
For the court, the Administration "did not weigh the interests of the minors, much less verify their individual circumstances."
The Supreme Court rejects the appeals of the State Attorney's Office and the Autonomous City of Ceuta against the sentences of a Court of Ceuta and the Superior Court of Justice of Andalusia that estimated the reasons of the Neighborhood Coordinator for the Monitoring of Youth and Minors - who acted on his behalf and on behalf of eight Moroccan minors - and established that Spain committed a de facto act by not following the procedures established in the Immigration Law and Regulations in the return of the minors.
The sentence takes into account the seriousness of what happened on May 17 and 18, 2021 in Ceuta, when the massive and illegal entry of about 12,000 people occurred, of them about 1,500 minors, and that this represented an "extraordinary challenge" both for the State and for said autonomous community.
However, it points out that the debate in the lawsuit is about whether the Agreement between Spain and Morocco of March 6, 2007 was sufficient in itself to justify the decision to return the minors to Morocco or if, on the contrary, it had to be takes into account the procedure of the Immigration Law, which requires opening an individualized administrative process, information on the situation of the affected person, hearing them if they are mature and intervention of the Prosecutor's Office.
For the Supreme Court, the agreement between Spain and Morocco "does not constitute a sufficient regulatory basis to decide the return of minors", basically because it does not contemplate any procedure or procedural requirement, especially when there are minors involved.
Furthermore, the ruling rejects the argument of the State Attorney's Office that it was an exceptional situation because, in the opinion of the magistrates, the passivity of the administration is not argued.
The Supreme Court adds that the argument of "absolute non-observance" of procedural steps is reinforced by another consideration, which is what is established in article 4 of Protocol number 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights, 'which establishes in a lapidary manner that “there are collective expulsions of foreigners are prohibited.
The Chamber highlights that this conventional norm has been ratified by Spain and is part of the Spanish legal system, so the decision agreeing to the return of a large number of unaccompanied minors without having followed any procedure constituted a collective expulsion of foreigners.
Finally, the magistrates respond to the allegation of both the State Attorney and the lawyer of the Autonomous City of Ceuta that Morocco not only did not make any protest about the way in which the return of the minors was carried out, but that at the same time He apparently sent an email to the Spanish authorities generically saying that everyone was fine and back with their families.
