Y v. Italy and Z v. Italy (third-party intervention)
Two survivors of torture, whose identities are withheld for their protection, filed a complaint against Italy to the European Court of Human Rights for its failure to execute an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for one of their torturers, Osama Elmasry Njeem (Mr. Njeem).
CASE BACKGROUND
The applicant Y is a South Sudanese national who fled his country in 2018. Before arriving in Italy in June 2022, he was detained in Libya, in the Al-Jadida detention centre and in the Mitiga military base, both controlled by Mr. Njeem, former chief of the Libyan paramilitary police. Y alleges that he was tortured and forced to fight in a military group led by Mr. Njeem.
The applicant, Z, is an Ivorian national who fled to Libya as a minor. There she was held in slavery, subjected to sexual abuse and eventually brought to Mitiga prison, where she states she was tortured, raped and ill-treated at the hands, among others, of Mr. Njeem, reportedly director of the prison. She eventually reached Italy by boat in 2017.
On 17 January 2025 the ICC Prosecutor issued an arrest warrant for Mr. Njeem, accused of torture, rape, sexual slavery, and murder, among others, as war crimes and crimes against humanity. Two days later, he was arrested in Italy. However, Rome’s Court of Appeal ordered his release, and he was repatriated to Libya on an Italian State aircraft. The ICC’s Pre-Trial Chamber concluded that Italy had breached its duty to cooperate with the ICC by not surrendering the suspect.
In their complaints to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), both applicants argue that by failing to enforce the ICC warrant, Italy violated Article 2 (right to life) and Article 3 (prohibition of torture and of inhuman degrading treatment) of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR).
INTERVENTION
REDRESS, with Route Justice and TRIAL International submitted an amicus brief to the ECtHR in this case on 29 October 2026.
The intervention aimed to clarify what the ECHR requires of a State when a person suspected of torture, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed abroad is present on its territory and an international court has requested their arrest and surrender.
The intervention emphasised that procedural obligations under Articles 2 and 3 of the ECHR may also apply to crimes committed outside the State’s territory in certain circumstances. These include the suspect’s presence in the State, coupled with an international legal obligation to investigate the crimes, a request for cooperation from an international court, and the lack of realistic alternatives for accountability in the country where the crimes occurred. It also stressed the legal and practical obstacles to accountability in Libya, including limited cooperation with the International Criminal Court.
The intervention therefore concluded that, in these circumstances, a State’s duty to protect the rights of victims may require it to cooperate with an international court, including by arresting and surrendering a suspect where necessary to ensure accountability.
The intervention was complementary to the amicus brief submitted by the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH) which sought to clarify that the ICC’s procedure for addressing States’ failure to cooperate does not prevent the ECtHR from examining individual complaints concerning human rights violations.
The intervention put forward two main arguments. First, the applications before the ECtHR are distinct from the ICC-non-cooperation procedure, as they involve different parties and complaints. Second, the ICC procedure cannot be considered an alternative international process for examining individual human rights complaints, as it does not provide individuals with the same opportunity to seek justice and redress.
FIDH therefore argued that the ECtHR should be able to examine these applications. More broadly, the cases offer the Court an opportunity to clarify how States’ obligations to cooperate with the ICC interact with their obligations under the ECHR, particularly their duty to protect individual rights and ensure access to effective remedies.
QUICK FACTS
Case name: Y v. Italy (application no. 13270/25) and Z v. Italy (application no. 7051/26)
Court/Body: European Court of Human Rights
Date Intervention filed: 29 October 2026
Current Status: Case Pending
ORGANISATIONS
- Route Justice: is an international NGO dedicated to transformative justice in Libya. It works to defend and promote human rights in the country and to open routes to justice for migrants who have been abused and tortured there. It also conducts in depth-research and provides concrete recommendations to third States and internationals institutions on constructive engagement with Libya.
- TRIAL International: is an international NGO dedicated to fighting impunity for international crimes and supporting victims in their pursuit of justice. Through strategic litigation, documentation, expertise-sharing, and targeted advocacy, it works alongside victims, bridges accountability gaps and promotes systemic change. Together with REDRESS, is part of the Global Initiative Against Impunity, a Consortium of eight international NGOs and the Coalition for the ICC, co-funded by the European Union, which aims to contribute to the fight against impunity by supporting a comprehensive, integrated and inclusive approach to justice and accountability for serious human rights violations and international crimes.