Universal-Womens-accesss-to-justice-Publications-Practitioners-Guide-Series-2016-ENG

V
WOMEN’S ACCESS TO JUSTICE FOR GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE 287
Of particular relevance for migrants is the fact that the State’s
jurisdiction may extend in certain situations to international
waters. The IACHR has found that the interception and return
of asylum-seekers, on the high seas, to their country of origin
constituted a violation of their right to seek asylum in a foreign
country, as granted by the ADRDM and the ACHR. 710 The Grand
Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has clearly
stated that measures of interception of boats, including on the
high seas, fall within the jurisdiction of the State implementing
the interception. From the moment of effective control of the
boat, all the persons on it fall within the jurisdiction of the
intercepting State, which must secure and protect their human
rights. 711 The Committee against Torture has also held that the
seizure of a boat in international waters, and even the control
over the passengers in foreign territory in order to proceed with
their identification and repatriation, attracted the jurisdiction of
the State which had control over them. 712 The same principles
apply in the context of rescue operations at sea, analysed in
Chapter 1.
In a case concerning human trafficking, the European Court of
Human Rights has held that there jurisdiction was established
for the State of origin of the person trafficked in so far as its
obligations to protect the concerned person from trafficking
were engaged. 713
710
Haitian Interdictions Case, IACHR, op. cit., fn. 46, paras. 156,157
and 163.
711
See, Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy, ECtHR, op. cit., fn 46, paras.
73-82; Medvedyev and Others v. France, ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 51,
paras. 62-67.
712
J.H.A. v. Spain, CAT, op. cit., fn. 266, para. 8.2.
713
Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, ECtHR, op. cit., fn. 236, paras. 206-
208.