ECHR – Case Ukraine v. Russia
In a decision delivered on June 25, 2024, in the case Ukraine v. Russia (Applications 20958/14 and 38334/18), the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), in a unanimous judgment, declared that the Russian Federation had violated the European Convention on Human Rights in Crimea through a "practice of administrative" human rights violations.
This case stems from Ukraine's allegations of a "pattern of persecution" against Ukrainians for their political positions and/or pro-Ukrainian activities. The claims outlined human rights abuses as part of a "campaign of repression," including disappearances, mistreatment, unlawful detentions, forced acquisition of Russian citizenship, suppression of Ukrainian media and language in schools, overcrowded pre-trial detention, convictions based on fabricated charges without fair trials, and transfers from Crimea to Russian prisons.
The Court first established its jurisdiction over the case despite Russia’s expulsion from the Council of Europe and the ECHR’s jurisdiction in March 2022. The Court determined that the alleged violations occurred from Russia’s occupation of Crimea in February 2014 until September 2022, a period during which Russia remained under ECHR jurisdiction.
The systematic violations committed by state authorities were classified as "administrative practice," a concept outlined in prior cases such as Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia (Applications No.8019/16, 43800/14 e 28525/20; full ruling available here. This refers to the "repetition of acts incompatible with the Convention" combined with "official tolerance by the respondent State."
The ECHR found violations of the following: Articles 2 (right to life), 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), 5 (right to liberty and security), 6 (right to a fair trial), 7 (no punishment without law), 8 (right to respect for private and family life), 9 (freedom of religion), 10 (freedom of expression), 11 (freedom of assembly), 14 (prohibition of discrimination), and 18 (limitation on the use of restrictions on rights) of the European Convention on Human Rights; Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property), Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 (right to education), and Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 (freedom of movement). Furthermore, the Court found Russia in breach of Article 38 (obligation to furnish all necessary facilities to examine the case).
Regarding the legal framework applied by Russia to the occupied region, the Court emphasized that International Humanitarian Law (IHL) "clearly stipulates an obligation to respect the laws in force in the 'occupied' territory," which Russia failed to observe.
We invite everyone to follow the Observatório on social media for more relevant and up-to-date content on Constitutional Justice.
The full text of the ruling is available here.
