CRC/C/80/D/4/2016 were substantial grounds for believing that there was a real risk of irreparable harm to the author in Morocco. The author emphasizes that, as part of this assessment, the Spanish authorities should have taken into account his age and vulnerable situation 11 and the particularly serious consequences that inadequate food and health services might cause in his case.12 3.5 Finally, the author submits that the State party, by its action and omission, 13 did not at any time take into account the best interests of the child recognized in article 3 of the Convention in that: (a) it failed to consider how its State policy and standard practice of indiscriminate summary deportations impacts on the best interests of the group of unaccompanied minors assembled at the Spanish-Moroccan border in Melilla, including the best interests of the author, as a member of this group; 14 (b) it did not allow the author to enter Spanish territory and did not take any steps to verify his identity, assess his situation and protect him as an unaccompanied child; 15 and (c) the Spanish Civil Guard did not take the author’s personal circumstances into account, but instead arrested him, handcuffed him and summarily deported him to Morocco without considering any other alternative that would be in his best interests. 3.6 The author proposes, as possible reparation measures, that the State party: (a) amend or repeal Organic Act No. 4/2015 on safeguarding the security of citizens, and in particular its tenth additional provision on the special regime applicable in Ceuta and Melilla, so as to include a specific reference to the need to comply with the provisions of the Convention and to ensure that children at the border undergo identity checks; (b) create and implement a special protocol for the use of the Spanish Civil Guard in Melilla and Ceuta that includes specific measures for the identification and protection of children at the border; and (c) grant financial compensation to the author and take steps to provide for his rehabilitation, if necessary. State party’s observations on admissibility 4.1 In its observations of 30 August 2016, the State party specifies, with regard to the facts, that when the author entered Spain on 30 December 2014 he gave a different name – Y.D. rather than D.D. – and different nationality and said that he was of full legal age. 16 It submits that the State party cannot be held responsible for the events that occurred during the brief period17 in which, on 2 December 2014, the Spanish authorities exercised their legitimate right and international obligation to repel the author’s assault on and unlawful attempt to breach the border crossing. It adds that the incident was not a deportation because the author was not able to complete his attempt to enter Spain illegally. The State party also states that, on 2 December 2014, the author did not have any form of identity document in his possession, exchanged not a single word with the Spanish Civil Guard in Melilla, “did not at any time claim to be a minor and did not appear to be one”. It maintains that, in the absence of any express claim or any form of identity document, a person who 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 4 The author cites European Court of Human Rights, P. and S. v. Poland (application No. 57375/08), decision of 30 October 2012; Mubilanzila Mayeka and Kaniki Mitunga v. Belgium (application No. 13178/03), decision of 12 January 2007, para. 69; and Rahimi v. Greece (application No. 8687/08), decision of 5 July 2011, paras. 92–94. The author cites the Committee’s general comment No. 6, para. 27. The author cites the Committee’s general comment No. 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration, paras. 17–18. Ibid., para. 19. The author cites the Committee’s general comment No. 6, paras. 2, 84 and 87. The State party provides copies of the identification cards issued to Y.D. by the temporary reception centre for migrants in Melilla (with a photo in which the author’s face is not clear) and the Melilla police centre (with a photo in which his face is clear). These show date of entry into Spain (30 December 2014), date of birth (2 November 1994), country of birth (Burkina Faso) and parents’ names (Saka and Yavi). The State party cites, and provides a link to, a video produced by the NGO Prodein, purely, it indicates, with the aim of illustrating the practice of refusing admission at the border. The State party refers to the period of less than one minute in this video in which the Spanish Civil Guard are shown detaining, handcuffing and returning the author to the other side of one of the fences at the Melilla border crossing. GE.19-07971

Select target paragraph3