Twenty-five French nationals accused of joining Islamic State have asked the European Court of Human Rights to intervene after France refused to repatriate them from Iraq.
The French nationals had previously been held in Kurdish-run detention camps in Syria before being transferred to an Iraqi prison.
Their lawyers are now challenging France’s refusal to bring them back to French territory for trial.
They allege that their clients face the risk of torture, unfair judicial proceedings and capital punishment if prosecuted in Iraq.
The application creates a difficult collision between citizenship, counter-terrorism, national sovereignty and European human-rights law.
France’s position rests heavily on Iraqi sovereignty.
Iraq is an independent state with jurisdiction to prosecute crimes committed on its territory, and France has resisted demands that it negotiate the return of French nationals detained in the region.
French courts have also held that decisions requiring negotiations with foreign governments to secure repatriation are inseparable from the conduct of France’s foreign relations and therefore fall outside ordinary judicial review.
France’s Conseil d’État reaffirmed that principle in July.
The new application to Strasbourg does not mean that the European Court of Human Rights has ordered France to repatriate the 25 applicants.
They are asking the court to intervene.
The case nevertheless raises a much broader question about the obligations that citizenship creates when nationals travel abroad, allegedly join a terrorist organisation and subsequently fall into the custody of another sovereign state.
France can argue that its citizens chose to enter Islamic State territory and that Iraq is entitled to prosecute crimes committed within its jurisdiction.
Their lawyers argue that citizenship cannot simply be disregarded when French nationals face alleged torture, proceedings they say are unfair and the possibility of execution.
That leaves Strasbourg confronting a difficult boundary.
How far do a European state’s human-rights obligations extend when its citizens are imprisoned beyond its territory and bringing them home would require diplomatic negotiations with another sovereign government?
The answer could matter well beyond these 25 cases.
Does France have a duty to bring alleged jihadists home to face French justice, or can it leave its citizens to face justice in the country where they are held?
More to follow.
Sources: Le Monde, 12 September 2026; Conseil d’État, 16 July 2026
Join the Dissenting Citizen Newsletter
Independent news and commentary delivered directly to your inbox.
