ECHR Rules Against Cyprus Over 13-Month Detention at Menoyia Centre

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled in K.A. v. Cyprus that Cyprus violated a Moroccan asylum seeker’s right to liberty by holding him for 13½ months on national-security grounds. The court found a breach of Article 5 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Fifth Section issued its unanimous judgment on October 1, 2026. It ordered the state to pay €5,000 in non-pecuniary damages and €3,750 in costs.

The detention lasted from January 10, 2019, until February 24, 2020. The court accepted that the security material supported the initial decision, but found it did not justify keeping K.A. detained for that length of time.

The judgment also rejected a separate complaint about judicial review. The two findings concerned different questions.

The court accepted the initial security concern but rejected the length of detention

K.A. entered the island irregularly through the north and applied for asylum on January 10, 2019. Authorities ordered his detention that same day after a database run by a cooperating foreign service flagged him as a terrorism suspect.

Officials held him at the Menoyia Detention Centre for Prohibited Immigrants. His case then took a different turn: authorities recognized him as a refugee in April 2019, but later revoked that status on national-security grounds and rejected his international-protection claim.

The court did not dismiss the original security concern. It found that the domestic material about the suspected terrorism link could support detention at the outset. Its criticism focused on the months that followed, when the authorities continued to rely on the same basis.

The decision addressed whether that continuing detention remained connected to its stated purpose and lasted no longer than reasonably required. The court found that the authorities lacked a consistent understanding of why he was being held, while the asylum proceedings made no progress.

The asylum case did not advance while the suspicion remained unchanged

The court said the information underlying the suspicions had not shifted, and the protection proceedings had not moved forward. It concluded that the detention had lasted beyond what was reasonably required.

“the material underlying the suspicions remained unchanged”

“the asylum proceedings had not been advanced”

“there was no sufficiently close connection with the prevention of unauthorised entry”

Those findings addressed the connection between the security rationale and the continuing immigration detention. The court concluded that the detention lacked a sufficiently close link to preventing unauthorized entry, even though the initial security material could support the first decision.

K.A. remained in custody until February 24, 2020, when the Supreme Court ordered his release on a writ of habeas corpus. That release came after more than a year in detention; the European court assessed the period beginning with his asylum application and initial detention on January 10, 2019.

The separate challenge to judicial review failed

The court found no violation of Article 5 § 4, which concerned the complaint about effective judicial review and access to secret material. It concluded that K.A. had been told the legal basis and reasons for his detention.

He also had access to the remaining relevant material, was represented by counsel and could challenge the open material in domestic proceedings. The court therefore found no breach on that separate issue, while finding that the length of detention violated his right to liberty.

The awards total €8,750: €5,000 for non-pecuniary harm and €3,750 for legal costs. The state has three months to pay them.

This article provides general information and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified immigration attorney about your specific case.