The removal order against five Ethiopians, 41 Eritreans and their 12 children has been stayed pending a decision on their claim of a breach of human rights after the Civil Court yesterday upheld their application for an injunction.

Mr Justice David Scicluna ordered the issue of a warrant of prohibitory injunction against the attorney general, the police commissioner and the principal immigration officer.

The immigrants are claiming that the issue of removal orders against them was in violation of their fundamental human rights as protected by the European convention on human rights and the constitution.

The immigrants had applied for refugee status but their request had been dismissed and the dismissal confirmed on appeal.

The authorities had however submitted that a warrant of prohibitory injunction could not be issued because the criminal proceedings had been concluded as had the proceedings to establish whether they were entitled to refugee status.

This argument was however dismissed by Mr Justice Scicluna on the grounds that not all the proceedings against the applicants had been decided.

In any event, the law governing refugees provided that the decisions of the appeals board were final without prejudice to the provisions of the constitution and the European convention on human rights.

The United Nations was persuading refugees from Eritrea to return to their country and that refugee status in respect of such nationals was being removed, the authorities said.

But Mr Justice Scicluna ruled that the UN document exhibited by the authorities also indicated that there could be some instances where some persons would continue to receive refugee status.

Mr Justice Scicluna declared that applicants would suffer irremediable prejudice if they were removed from Malta before their constitutional applications were decided upon and he upheld it.

Dr George Abela was counsel to the immigrants.