## Facts

- Osama Mustafa Hassan Nasr (Abu Omar), an Egyptian national granted political asylum in Italy and living in Milan, was abducted in Milan on February 17, 2003.
- The abduction was carried out in a coordinated operation involving U.S. intelligence agents and Italian intelligence personnel.
- Nasr was taken to the Aviano air base, flown via Germany to Egypt, and placed in secret detention.
- In Egypt, he was held incommunicado for extended periods and subjected to severe physical and psychological ill-treatment during interrogations; later medical evidence was consistent with torture and post-traumatic stress disorder.
- Nasr’s wife, Nabila Ghali, lawfully resident in Italy, experienced prolonged uncertainty about his whereabouts and serious disruption to private and family life.
- Italian prosecutors investigated the kidnapping and identified numerous U.S. agents and Italian officials as involved.
- The Italian executive invoked state secrecy over significant evidence; the Constitutional Court upheld the secrecy claims, preventing use of protected material in criminal proceedings.
- Italian proceedings against Italian officials were dismissed due to excluded evidence; U.S. agents were convicted in absentia, but Italy did not seek extradition or otherwise enforce the sentences.
- Nasr and Ghali applied to the European Court of Human Rights in 2009, alleging violations of Convention rights tied to the abduction, transfer, ill-treatment risk, and lack of effective remedies.

## Issues

1. Whether Italy bore responsibility for Nasr’s abduction, transfer to Egypt, and exposure to torture or inhuman treatment, including for foreseeable risk arising from cooperation with foreign intelligence (Articles 3 and 5).
2. Whether Italy failed to satisfy the procedural duty under Article 3 to conduct an effective investigation and secure accountability, given the use of state secrecy and resulting impunity.
3. Whether the events and ensuing lack of accountability interfered with the applicants’ private and family life (Article 8).
4. Whether Italy provided effective remedies for the alleged violations, considering the impact of state secrecy and non-enforcement of convictions (Article 13, in conjunction with Articles 3, 5, and 8).

## Decision

- The Court found Italy responsible for multiple Convention violations arising from the extraordinary rendition operation.
- Article 3 (substantive) was violated because Italy’s cooperation enabled transfer to Egypt where the risk of torture or inhuman treatment was well-known and foreseeable.
- Article 3 (procedural) was violated because invocation of state secrecy prevented effective prosecution and punishment of those responsible, rendering the investigation ineffective in Convention terms.
- Article 5 was violated due to Nasr’s enforced disappearance and secret detention resulting from the operation and Italy’s participation.
- Article 8 was violated due to the serious interference with the applicants’ private and family life caused by the abduction, incommunicado detention, and resulting family disruption.
- Article 13 (with Articles 3, 5, and 8) was violated because state secrecy and non-enforcement of domestic outcomes deprived the applicants of a realistic avenue for redress.
- The Court awarded just satisfaction to the applicants.

## Legal Principles

- A State violates Article 3 when it knowingly enables or participates in the transfer of an individual to another State where there is a real and foreseeable risk of treatment prohibited by Article 3.
- Article 3’s procedural obligation requires an investigation that is effective in practice and capable of leading to identification and punishment of those responsible; formal investigative steps are insufficient if accountability is blocked.
- State secrecy cannot be used to secure impunity for serious human-rights violations; where secrecy disables judicial scrutiny and prevents accountability, it is incompatible with the procedural requirements of Article 3.
- Enforced disappearance and secret detention attributable to State participation constitute a grave breach of the right to liberty and security under Article 5.
- Abduction and prolonged incommunicado detention that fracture family relations and create sustained uncertainty can amount to serious interferences with private and family life under Article 8.
- Article 13 requires effective remedies in law and in practice; remedies are not effective when secrecy and non-enforcement make redress illusory.

## Conclusion

The Court held that Italy’s cooperation in an extraordinary rendition and its reliance on state secrecy that blocked accountability made it responsible for the applicant’s unlawful disappearance, foreseeable exposure to torture, and resulting harms to family life, and that Italy failed to provide effective remedies for these violations.


Nasr & Ghali v. Italy, App. No. 44883/09 (Eur. Ct. H.R. 2016)