DOCSLIB.ORG

26 February Criminal Case”. Part 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
26 February Criminal Case”. Part 1 26 February CRIMINA L CASE Representatives of 6 organizations from 4 countries worked together on drafting Part 1 of the Report “Recon- struction and legal analysis of the events of 26 February 2014 outside the building of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea in Simferopol”, namely: Kirill Koroteev �The Human Rights Center “Memorial”, Russia Roman Martynovskyy �Regional Centre for Human Rights, Ukraine Sergey Ostaf �Resource Center for Human Rights (CReDO), Moldova Vadim Pivovarov �Association of Ukrainian Human Rights Monitors on Law Enforcement, Ukraine Olga Salomatova �Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights, Poland Daria Svyrydova �Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union, Ukraine Aleksandr Sedov �Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union, Ukraine Sergey Shvets �Association of Ukrainian Human Rights Monitors on Law Enforcement, Ukraine Vladimir Yavorskiy �independent expert in the field of freedom of peaceful assembly, Ukraine-Belarus “Report of the International Expert Group. “26 February criminal case”. Part 1. Reconstruction and legal analysis of the events of 26 February 2014 outside the building of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea in Simferopol”/ Edited by: R. Martynovskyy, D. Svyrydova. - Kiev, 2017. – 100 p. This Report presents the results of work of the International Expert Group on the so-called “26 February criminal case”, namely: reconstruction and legal analysis of the events that took place on 26 February 2014 outside the building of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea in Simferopol, and their consequences. On that day, two people perished and several other protesters were injured during two rallies organized by the party “Russian Unity” and the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People. The report also contains conclusions and recommendations of the expert group addressed to the authorities of Ukraine and the Russian Federation, non-governmental and international organizations. The report will be useful to all those who are interested in issues related to observance of international human rights standards. © Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union, 2017 REPORT OF THE INTERNATIONAL EXPERT GROUP 26 FEBRUARY CRIMINAL CASE Part 1. Reconstruction and legal analysis of the events of 26 February 2014 outside the building of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea in Simferopol GLOSSARY ARC Autonomous Republic of Crimea ODIHR Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights SCARC, SC of the AR of Crimea Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea VRU Verkhovna Rada (Supreme Council) of Ukraine CPHRFF Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms EU European Union ECtHR European Court of Human Rights MIA Ministry of Internal Affairs SDPU “Self-Defense Paramilitary Unit”, “People’s Militia of Crimea”, “Self- defense of Crimea” OSCE Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe UN United Nations Organization RF Russian Federation SSU Security Service of Ukraine USSR Union of Soviet Socialist Republics CC Criminal Code CPC Criminal Procedural Code FZ Federal Law FKZ Federal Constitutional Law 4 CONTENTS Glossary ....................................................................................04 Introduction .................................................................................. 07 Methodology of the Study .................................................................... 10 Section 1. Reconstruction and legal analysis of the events of 26 February 2014 ..................12 1.1. General description and background of the events .......................................12 1.2. Key individuals and groups that participated in the events ...............................16 1.3. Reconstruction of the events of 26 February 2014 ........................................26 Episode 1. Gathering of rallyers, designation of positions (8:00-11:10) ............................26 Episode 2. First clashes (11:10-13:00) ............................................................33 Episode 3. Escalation of confrontation in the inner yard in front of the Supreme Council of the ARC (13:00-15:00) .....................................43 Episode 4. Culmination: the beginning of extraordinary session of the SC ARC, peak tension of the situation in the inner yard. Aggravation of the conflict, occupation of the inner yard by the “pro-Ukrainian” rallyers, breaking into the SC ARC building (15:10-15:50) ...............................................50 Episode 5. Partial withdrawal of the rallyers from the inner yard in front of the SC ARC, occupation of positions in the inner yard by the pro-Russian activists (15:50-17:00) ....59 Section 2. Investigation of the events of 26 February 2014 ...................................... 63 2.1. Investigation of the events by law enforcement agencies of Ukraine ......................63 2.2. Criminal prosecution of some participants of the events pursuant to the legislation of the Russian Federation.............................................. 65 2.3. Procedures for qualification and protection of the rights of A. Chiygoz in connection with criminal prosecution following the events of 26 February .............71 Section 3. Legal analysis of the events of 26 February 2014 ......................................72 3.1. Jurisdiction, compliance with the principle of “no punishment without law” ..............72 3.2. Legal Regulation of the Freedom of Peaceful Assembly ...................................78 3.2.1. Organization of peaceful assembly .......................................................78 3.2.2. The «peacefulness» of the assembly and the comply with the «requirements of public order» .............................................................................................................................................................81 3.2.3. State’s positive obligations, legal regulation of police actions .............................84 3.2.4. Qualification of events, liability of the organizers and rallyers .............................89 General conclusions and recommendations ...................................................94 5 SUPREME COUNCIL OF THE AUTONOMOUS REPUBLIC OF CRIMEA 6 INTRODUCTION THIS DOCUMENT is the Part 1 of the International Expert Group Report on the “26 February criminal case” and contains reconstruction and legal analysis of the events of 26 February 2014 outside the building of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea in Simferopol, when two rallies organized by the party “Russian Unity” and the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People were held. The reason for the rallies was the decision of the Chairperson of the ARC SC Vladimir Konstanti- nov to hold an extraordinary session including possible consideration of the status of the Crimean peninsula. The rallies were followed by the clashes resulting in the stampede in which two people perished and several other protesters were injured. Subsequently, law enforcement agencies of Ukraine opened criminal proceedings on the facts of deaths and physical injuries. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, UN agencies, the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court1 estimated further devel- opments in Crimea as occupation and subsequent illegal annexation of the Crimean peninsula. There is no doubt that starting from 21 March 2014 the Russian Federation carried out all forms of the effective control2 over the territory of the Crimean peninsula. In connection with the actual change of jurisdiction from the Ukrainian law to the legislation of the RF starting from the spring of 2014, the above criminal proceedings were continued by law enforcement agencies of Crimea created after the annexation, and requalified in accordance with the RF legislation. Since January 2015 the investigation of these events was conducted in Crimea in the framework of criminal pro- ceedings on the organization and participation in mass riots (Art. 212 of the RF CC). Totally, several Crimean Tatars have been indicted in connection with this case3. The consequences of the events of February 26 outside the ARC SC in Simferopol and their impli- cations for human rights preconditioned the creation and work of the International Expert Group. THE INTERNATIONAL EXPERT GROUP was formed on the basis of the decision taken in December 2015 by the civil society organizations from three countries (Moldova, Poland, Ukraine). The follow- ing organizations decided to create the group: the Regional Center for Human Rights; the Resource Center for Human Rights (CReDO); the Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union; the Helsinki Founda- tion for Human Rights. 1 Resolution of the UN General Assembly of 27 March 2014 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/ RES/68/262&referer=/english/&Lang=R http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/ENACARegion/Pages/UAReports.aspx Resolution of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe - 1988 (2014)1 https://goo.gl/O13sIQ Resolution of the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE “On the Continuation of Clear, Gross and Uncorrected Violations of OSCE Commitments and International Norms by the Russian Federation” https://goo.gl/f9QOqDhttp://www.osce.org/ru/odihr/180601?download=true Annual report of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court of 14 November 2016 https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/otp/161114-otp-repPE_ENG.pdf https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/otp/161114-otp-rep-PE-Ukraine.pdf 2 https://rg.ru/2014/03/22/krim-site-dok.html http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/20605
Load more

Recommended publications
  • En En Motion for a Resolution
    European Parliament 2014-2019 Plenary sitting B8-0552/2017 3.10.2017 MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION with request for inclusion in the agenda for a debate on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law pursuant to Rule 135 of the Rules of Procedure on the cases of Crimean Tatar leaders Akhtem Chiygoz and Ilmi Umerov and journalist Mykola Semena (2017/2869(RSP)) Elena Valenciano, Victor Boştinaru, Soraya Post, Tibor Szanyi on behalf of the S&D Group RE\P8_B(2017)0552_EN.docx PE611.478v01-00 EN United in diversity EN B8-0552/2017 European Parliament resolution on the cases of Crimean Tatar leaders Akhtem Chiygoz and Ilmi Umerov and journalist Mykola Semena (2017/2869(RSP)) The European Parliament, - having regard to its previous resolutions on Ukraine and Russia, and especially those of 4 February 2016 on the human rights situation in Crimea, in particular of the Crimean Tatars, of 12 May 2016 on the Crimean Tatars, as well as of 16 March 2017 on the Ukrainian prisoners in Russia and the situation in Crimea, - having regard to the United Nations General Assembly resolution 68/262 on the territorial integrity of Ukraine of 27 March 2014, affirming the commitment of the International community to the sovereignty, political independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders, and to the United Nations General Assembly resolution 71/205 on the “Situation of human rights in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (Ukraine)” of 19 December 2016, recognising the
    [Show full text]
  • [email protected] Website: Crimeahrg.Org
    e-mail: [email protected] website: crimeahrg.org CRIMEA: UKRAINIAN IDENTITY BANNED Analytical report on politically motivated persecution and discrimination on the ground of pro-Ukrainian opinion Kyiv February 2016 e-mail: [email protected] website: crimeahrg.org CRIMEA: UKRAINIAN IDENTITY BANNED Analytical report on politically motivated persecution and discrimination on the ground of pro-Ukrainian opinion Kyiv February 2016 Crimea: Ukrainian identity banned. Analytical report on politically motivated persecution and discrimination on the ground of pro-Ukrainian opinion. Editor: Olga Skrypnyk — Kyiv, 2016. — 40 pages. The Crimea Human Rights Group (CHRG) is the initiative of the Crimean human rights defenders and journalists, aimed at promoting the observance and protection of human rights in Crimea by attracting wide attention to problems of human rights and international human- itarian law in the territory of the Crimean peninsula, and the search for and development of mechanisms for the protection of human rights in Crimea. The activity of the CHRG is guided, first and foremost, by the rules of basic documents on human rights, namely the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Helsinki Final Act, the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and others. The CHRG is guided by principles of objectivity, reliability and timeliness while preparing and spreading information. The CHRG’s team consists of experts, human rights activists and journalists from different countries who are involved in monitoring and documenting human rights violations in Crimea, since February, 2014. CHRG focuses on human rights violations in connection with the illegal actions of the Russian Federation in Crimea.
    [Show full text]
  • HDIM.NGO/0127/16/EN 23 Sepetember 2016
    Working session 8: Rule of law The violations of the rule of law in Crimea 1. Violations of the rule of law in Crimea for the prosecution of citizens of Ukraine In Crimea, the principle of "no crime without law, no punishment" is regularly violated. Russia in violation of Article 64 of the Geneva Convention applies its criminal law in occupied Crimea. In addition, the de-facto authorities apply the action of the Russian criminal law back in time. Russia uses its criminal law to the events in the period up to March 2014 - when Russia was not de facto controlling Crimea; the peninsula was under the jurisdiction of Ukraine. Such actions violate the principle of punishment under the law, because, till March 2014 de facto Russian law did not apply to Crimea. An example of the use of retroactive legislation is the so-called case of "26 February". Six Crimean Tatars and Ahtem Chiygoz, Deputy Chairman of the Mezhdlis of Crimean Tatar people, are accused in this case. Chiygoz and two activists are held in inhumane conditions in Simferopol pre-trial detention centre since the beginning of 2015. Three other are in Simferopol under house arrest. They are accused of participation and organization of the meeting by the Crimean parliament on 26 February, 2014. Russia accuses them of violating Article 212 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - the organization of "mass disorder". However, in February 2014 Russian law de facto did not apply to the peninsula. In addition, on 26 February, 2014 another rally was held near the building of the Crimean parliament.
    [Show full text]
  • The Peninsula of Fear: Chronicle of Occupation and Violation of Human Rights in Crimea
    THE PENINSULA OF FEAR: CHRONICLE OF OCCUPATION AND VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN CRIMEA Kyiv 2016 УДК 341.223.1+342.7.03](477.75)’’2014/2016’’=111 ББК 67.9(4Укр-6Крм)412 Composite authors: Sergiy Zayets (Regional Center for Human Rights), Olexandra Matviychuk (Center for Civil Liberties), Tetiana Pechonchyk (Human Rights Information Center), Darya Svyrydova (Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union), Olga Skrypnyk (Crimean Human Rights Group). The publication contains photographs from public sources, o7 cial websites of the state authorities of Ukraine, the Russian Federation and the occupation authorities, Crimean Field Mission for Human Rights, Crimean Human Rights Group, the online edition Crimea.Realities / Radio Svoboda and other media, court cases materials. ‘The Peninsula of Fear : Chronicle of Occupation and Violation of Human Rights in Crimea’ / Under the general editorship of O. Skrypnyk and T. Pechonchyk. Second edition, revised and corrected. – Kyiv: KBC, 2016. – 136 p. ISBN 978-966-2403-11-4 This publication presents a summary of factual documentation of international law violation emanating from the occupation of the autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (Ukraine) by the Russian Federation military forces as well as of the human rights violations during February 2014 – February 2016. The publication is intended for the representatives of human rights organizations, civil activists, diplomatic missions, state authorities, as well as educational and research institutions. УДК 341.223.1+342.7.03](477.75)’’2014/2016’’=111 ББК 67.9(4Укр-6Крм)412 ISBN 978-966-2403-11-4 © S. Zayets, O. Matviychuk, T. Pechonchyk, D. Svyrydova, O. Skrypnyk, 2016 Contents Introduction.
    [Show full text]
  • Crimean Human Rights Situation Review
    e-mail: [email protected] website: crimeahrg.org CRIMEAN HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION REVIEW Monitoring review of the human rights situation in Crimea October 2016 This monitoring review was prepared by the Crimean Human Rights Group on the basis of materials collected in October 2016 Go to link, to see Go to link, to see monthly monitoring reviews of the thematic reviews and articles Crimean Human Rights Group of the Crimean Human Rights Group Crimean Human Rights Situation Review October 2016 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................2 2. CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS ...............................................................................................3 Right to liberty and security of the person ................................................................................3 Searches .....................................................................................................................................3 Politically motivated criminal prosecution .................................................................................5 Persecution of the Kiev Maidan members: Andrey Kolomiets’ case ...........................................................................................................5 «Case of February 26».............................................................................................................5 «Case of Hizb ut-Tahrir» ..........................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Learning from Ukraine
    THE UKRAINIAN JOURNAL The enemy is fi ghting like a coward, vilely, pretending he has nothing to do with it. No one believes him now but that doesn’t stop him. Oleg Sentsov PHOTO: MAKS LEVIN PHOTO: Learning from Ukraine Dear Reader, PHOTO: MAKS LEVIN The war in Donbass, Russia’s war against Ukraine that we know from television screens, is just part of the war that Russia has launched against all of us. After four years of Russian aggression, there is no point in reassuring yourself that there are no formal signs of war in our homeland. In this war, it is not tanks that play a major role. Even in Ukraine. The aggressor has long been among us. It is well-aware of our weaknesses in home and foreign policy. It engages in skilful contemporary and historical battles. It is deeply rooted in our economy, in large business, in the media and nonprofi t organizations where it fi nds loyal people who, in their own mercantile interests, are keen to serve it even better than those still active networks of Cold War agents. After the presidential elections in the United States and France, and last but not least in the Czech Republic, after the referendums in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, the West must understand that the war is already on its streets. The erosion of democracy in Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic is no longer just a signal and poses a real problem for Europe. Belarus is already occupied by Russia although the occupation is hybrid, hidden.
    [Show full text]
  • Borders in Flux: Ukraine As a Case Study of Russia's Approach to Its
    Borders in Flux: Ukraine as a Case Study of Russia’s Approach to its Borders Marek Menkiszak Abstract This paper examines the contemporary border between Ukraine and Russia as a case study of Russia’s approach to its borders. Two research questions are addressed: Firstly, what does the annexation of Crimea by Russia as well as its attempts to further undermine Ukraine’s territorial integrity in its eastern region of Donbas say about Russia’s peculiar approach to Ukraine and its borders? Secondly Whether and To what extent does Russia’s approach represent a broader pattern of Russia’s policy towards its borders? This paper is divided into three parts: the first part gives a brief account of the modern history of the Russian-Ukrainian border; the second part focuses on peculiar Russian approaches to Ukraine revealed during the current Russian-Ukrainian crisis; the third part puts “the Ukrainian case” into broader conceptual frameworks. This paper concludes that Russia’s recognition of the territorial integrity and the borders of the post-Soviet states is conditional and depends mainly on their participation in Russia-led integration projects. Introduction On March 18, 2014, Russian President Vladimir Putin and the new pro-Moscow leaders of Crimea signed an agreement between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Crimea (an autonomous region of Ukraine, which illegally declared its independence on February 27 and was acknowledged on March 17, when the so called Republic of Crimea was formally created) on the accession of the latter to
    [Show full text]
  • CRIMEAN TATARS and the POLITICS of SOVEREIGNTY: Small State Instrumentalization of Ethnic Minority Sovereignty Claims in Geopolitically Disputed Territory
    CRIMEAN TATARS AND THE POLITICS OF SOVEREIGNTY: Small State Instrumentalization of Ethnic Minority Sovereignty Claims in Geopolitically Disputed Territory by Kelley Humber B.A. Queen’s University, 2018 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in The Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies (Political Science) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) September 2019 © Kelley Humber, 2019 The following individuals certify that they have read, and recommend to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies for acceptance, a thesis/dissertation entitled: Crimean Tatars and the Politics of Sovereignty: Small State Instrumentalization of Ethnic Minority Sovereignty Claims in Geopolitically Disputed Territory_________________________ Submitted by Kelley Humber in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Political Science Examining Committee Dr. Lisa McIntosh Sundstrom Supervisor Dr. Katharina Coleman Additional Examiner ii Abstract This thesis analyzes the contemporary case of Ukraine and its shifting posture towards the ethnic minority group, Crimean Tatars, by tracing the relationship of Crimean Tatars and the Ukrainian Government prior to and following the 2014 Russian annexation of the Crimean Peninsula. After annexation, Ukraine has pursued a policy of recognizing, embracing, and advocating for the indigenous rights of Crimean Tatars in the wake of Russia’s annexation of this strategically located peninsula and the lingering territorial dispute between the two countries. This is significant as it represents a distinct departure from how national governments have traditionally accommodated this ethnic minority with indigenous claims to the Crimean Peninsula. On 20 March 2014, Ukraine officially recognized Crimean Tatars’ indigenous claims to Crimea, with Ukraine only prioritizing these claims once Crimea was de facto controlled by Russia, suggests an instrumentalization of the Crimean Tatar’s indigenous claims.
    [Show full text]
  • Security ENVIRONMENT CRIMEANTATARS VIOLATIONS ENVIRONMENT Ukraine
    Issue 1 (3), 2016 ELECTIONS GROUPS POLITICAL RIGHTS ETHNIC SOCIAL violations CONFLICT SYSTEM AUTHORITIES CRIMEAN TATARS Security ANALYSIS MINSK AGREEMENTS DONBAS CRIMEA HUMAN VIOLATIONS VISA LIBERALIZATION SYSTEM Ukraine ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENT AGENDA AUTHORITIES • HUMAN RIGHTS HUMAN SECURITY IMPLICATIONS • MINSK AGREEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION • CRIMEAN TATARS, AND ETC 1 Issue 1 (3), 2016 BOARD OF ADVISERS Dr. Dimitar Bechev (Bulgaria, Research fellow, London School of Economics and Social Science) Human Security Dr. Iulian Chifu (Romania, Director of the Conflict Analysis and Early Warning Center) Editors Dr. Igor Koval (Ukraine, Rector of Odessa Dr. Hanna Shelest National University by I.I. Mechnikov) Dr. Mykola Kapitonenko Dr. Sergey Minasyan (Armenia, Deputy Director at the Caucasus Institute) Publisher: Published by NGO “Promotion of Intercultural Stephan Meuser (Germany, Director of the Cooperation” (Ukraine), Representation of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation Centre of International Studies (Ukraine), in Ukraine and Belarus) Representation of the Friedrich Ebert James Nixey (United Kingdom, Head of the with the financial support of the Foundation in Ukraine. Russia and Eurasia Programme at Chatham House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs) academic/analytical journal in English Dr. Róbert Ondrejcsák (Slovakia, Director of UA: Ukraine Analytica is the first Ukrainian on International Relations, Politics and Center for European and North Atlantic Affairs) Economics. The journal is aimed for experts, diplomats, academics, students
    [Show full text]
  • Operational Highlights
    G 1 NER Y SE E CU O R T I A T Y N C E E C N T N R E E LL OF EXCE Energy Security: Operational Highlights No 11 2017 ENERGY SECURITY: OPERATIONAL HIGHLIGHTS No 11 2 3 Contents 4 Editorial ARTURAS PETKUS 5 Energy Security: Eight Relevant Lessons MICHAEL RÜHLE Relevant political and technological upheavals have brought about signif cant changes in the global energy landscape. Eight lessons can be learnt from them. Critical Energy infrastructure Protection 8 through Comprehensive Security ANTI-PEKKA MANNINEN AND HEIKI JAKSON The Finnish security policy is an example of a good approach to protect the critical energy infrastructure of a state. Regional standardization efforts and the analysis of the issues related to critical energy infrastructure from which best practices can be drawn are the focus of this article. The Role, Risks and the Strategic Importance 16 of Energy in Conflicts. The case of Ukraine EMANUELE NICOLA CECCHETTI AND HEIKI JAKSON A short historical overview from the ancient times to the Ukrainian crisis in 2014 shows that the role of energy in conflicts has evolved throughout time. The energy dimension of war. An overview 25 of the Ukrainian events in 2014-2016 OLEKSANDR SUKHODOLIA Russia targeted critical energy infrastructure in its conflict with Ukraine. The analysis of the events that characterized the conflict between them shows that the ‘energy dimension’ has been incorporated into hybrid warfare. 35 Critical Energy Infrastructure: Identification and protection MONIEK DE JONG AND LARRY HUGHES Several types of threats can affect critical energy infrastructure. Therefore, counter- measures are essential in order to increase the energy security of the energy system.
    [Show full text]
  • COMMITTEE on the ELIMINATION of DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN (CEDAW) 62Nd Session
    COMMITTEE ON THE ELIMINATION OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN (CEDAW) 62nd session Communication within CEDAW on violations committed by the Russian Federation on the territory of annexed Autonomous Republic of Crimea (ARC) Submitting NGOs: ‘Almenda’ Civic Education Center Center for Civil Liberties Human Rights Information Center Regional Center for Human Rights Ukrainian Center for Independent Political Research (UCIPR) Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union International Charitable Organization “Roma Women Fund Chirikli” Content I. Introduction II. Violations of women’s rights committed by the Russian Federation on the territory of annexed Autonomous Republic of Crimea Discrimination of and violence against women Violations of obligations on the elimination and prevention of domestic violence Violation of the right to free choice of profession Discrimination of women in the field of employment Violations of obligations to eradicate discrimination resulting from the activities of state authorities and institutions Violations of obligations to eradicate discrimination resulting from the activities of state authorities and institutions Restriction of possibilities to own property Discrimination of Roma women Restrictions on the exercise of the right to health by women - representatives of the group of PLWA Introduction As the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (hereafter – “the Committee”) will consider the 8th periodic report of the Russian Federation on implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women at its 62nd session, the Coalition of Ukrainian NGOs submits to the Committee the statement on the violations of women’s rights committed by the Russian Federation on the territory of annexed Autonomous Republic of Crimea.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Human Rights Situation in Ukraine, 16 February to 15 May 2019, Para
    Contents I. Executive summary .............................................................................................................................................. 1 II. OHCHR methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 3 III. Impact of hostilities .............................................................................................................................................. 6 A. Conduct of hostilities and civilian casualties .................................................................................................... 6 Civilian casualties ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Civilian casualties during the entire conflict period ...................................................................................... 7 Attacks on civilian objects ........................................................................................................................... 7 B. Impact of the conflict and COVID-19 on the population in the conflict zone..................................................... 8 Remedy and reparation for civilian victims of the conflict ............................................................................ 8 Freedom of movement in the context of COVID-19 ..................................................................................... 9 Right to social security .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]