DOCSLIB.ORG

Seventh Periodic Report of Ukraine on Implementation of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman Or Degrading Treatment Or Punishment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Seventh Periodic Report of Ukraine on Implementation of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman Or Degrading Treatment Or Punishment SEVENTH PERIODIC REPORT OF UKRAINE ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE AND OTHER CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT • KHARKIV KHARKIV HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION GROUP 2019 This report was prepared with financial support of This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union Довідкове видання Сьома періодична доповідь України про виконання положень конвенції ООН проти катУвань та нелюдяного або такого, що принижУє гідніСть, поводження чи покарання (англійською мовою) Відповідальний за випуск Євген Захаров Редактор Євген Захаров Комп’ютерна верстка Олег Мірошниченко Підписано до друку 06.12.2019 1 Формат 60 × 84 /8. Папір офсетний. Гарнітура PT Serif Умов. друк. арк. 8,83. Облік.-вид. арк. 8,43 Наклад 25 прим. Зам. № КС-08/19 ГО «ХаРКіВСьКа ПРаВОЗаХиСНа ГРУПа» 61002, Харків, а/с 10430 http://khpg.org http://library.khpg.org http://archive.khpg.org/ Друк: ФОП Капуста С. і. 61168, м. Харків, вул. Героїв Праці, 12-Б, кв. 143 Seventh Periodic Report of Ukraine on Implementation of the Convention against Tor- ture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment / Y. Zakharov, G. To- karev: compilation; CO «Kharkiv Human Rights Protection group». — «Kharkiv: 2019. — 76 p. This report was prepared by Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group with the support of the United Nations Develop- ment Program (UNDP). The views, expressed in this publication, are those of the authors and may not coincide with the official position of the UNDP. © Y. Zakharov, G. Tokarev, compilation, 2019 © CO «Kharkiv Human Rights Protection group», 2019 SEVENTH PERIODIC REPORT OF UKRAINE ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE AND OTHER CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT Contents Page Abbreviations/Glossary.................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Questions 1–9 — Responses to UN issues “List of issues before the reporting” ............................. 6 Questions 10, 11 — Crimes of torture ............................................................................................ 21 Questions 12, 13 — Responsibility of state officials for torture and other crimes ........................ 21 Questions 14 — Investigations of crimes of militants from volunteer battalions ......................... 22 Question 15 — Video recording of interrogations ......................................................................... 23 Question 19 — Independence of judges ......................................................................................... 24 Question 20, 24 — Protection of rights of asylum seekers and IDPs ........................................26, 31 Question 23 — Juvenile justice ...................................................................................................... 30 Question 27 — Prisoners’ rights .................................................................................................... 34 Question 28 — Visits of Ombudsman in the framework of the NPM ............................................ 37 Question 29 — Mobile groups’ activities on monitoring of institutions ....................................... 38 Questions 30, 31 — Monitoring of institutions by international bodies and NGOs ...................... 40 Question 32 — Access to places of detention and administrative premises of the Security Service ................................................................................................................... 43 Question 33 — Penitentiary medicine ........................................................................................... 44 Question 34 — Effectiveness of investigation of complaints on torture. Statistics of the State Investigation Bureau .................................................................................. 53 Question 35 — Disciplinary responsibility for ineffective investigations ..................................... 54 Question 36 — The results of criminal investigations into torture .............................................. 54 Question 40 — Means of restraint for persons with mental disorders .......................................... 65 ABBREVIATIONS/GLOssARY AFU Armed Forces of Ukraine ART Antiretroviral therapy ATO Anti-Terrorist Operation CAP Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine CC Criminal Code of Ukraine CGS Court Guard Service of Ukraine CEC Criminal Executive Code of Ukraine CP Criminal proceeding CPC Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman CPT or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Crimea Autonomous Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol Donbas Donetsk and Luhansk regions ECtHR European Court of Human Rights FLA Free legal aid IDP Internally Displaced Person JFO Joint Forces Operation KHPG Civil organization “Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group” MoD Ministry of Defence of Ukraine MoIA Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine MoJ Ministry of Justice of Ukraine MoH Ministry of Healthcare of Ukraine OHCHR Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights PG Prosecutor-General of Ukraine PI Penitentiary Institution PC Penal Colony PTDC Pre-Trial Detention Centre RONP Regional Office of National Police SBGS State Border Guard Service of Ukraine SBI State Investigation Bureau of Ukraine SCES State Criminal Enforcement Service of Ukraine SIHC State Institution “SCES Health Centre” SMS State Migration Service of Ukraine SСU Supreme Court of Ukraine SСJ Supreme Council of Justice United Nations Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and other Cruel, SPT Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment SSU Security Service of Ukraine THC Temporary Holding Centre for Foreign Nationals and Stateless Persons of the SMS THF Temporary Holding Facility TOT Temporarily Occupied Territory INTRODUCTION In the second half of July 2020, the UN Committee against Torture (hereinafter — the Committee) should consider the Seventh Periodic Report of Ukraine on implementation of the provisions of the UN Convention against Torture and Cruel Treatment. We recall that the previous Sixth Periodic Report of Ukraine was con- sidered by the Committee in November 2014 and the periodic reports are provided once in four years. In early 2017, the Committee provided a list of 42 issues completely covering the problems of torture and ill-treatment to the Government of Ukraine. In November 2018 the Government had prepared a draft of the Seventh Periodic Report. The draft is posted on the website of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine for discussion and it is available at https://minjust.gov.ua/news/announcement/gromadski-obgovorennya- proektu-periodichnoi-dopovidi-ukraini-pro-vikonannya-polojen-konventsii-oon-proti-katuvan?fbclid=Iw AR18NrKG6QsgGcRe_ti02XGCs26mkeWIQwPhwv4rtbLnnfHr0j7TwYjM5Pw. This draft was prepared ahead of many important amendments in legislation and practice which took place in 2015 — 2018. However, the Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group (KHPG) has prepared the Shadow Report to the draft report of the Government and offers it to the reader. We hope that it will be use- ful for the governmental experts. The KHPG continues the tradition of commenting the periodic reports of the Government on implementation of the UN Convention against Torture. In 1997, 2001, 2007 and 2014 the KHPG prepared and published its Shadow Reports to the Third, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Reports respec- tively. The Shadow Report of the KHPG represents the answers to almost all 42 issues of the UN Committee against Torture. It covers a variety of issues of the respect of the Convention during November 2014 — Au- gust 2019 and it was prepared on the basis of its own information and the information got from the partner organizations and state authorities. The Shadow Report of the KHPG is submitted to the UN Committee against Torture and it aims at comprehensive coverage of the issues of respect of the rights enshrined in the Convention and attraction of the attention of the Committee`s experts to the most actual problems in the sphere of their implementation which in our opinion are not reflected or which are incompletely covered in the draft report of the Government of Ukraine. We admit that during the past five years there have been positive changes and trends in Ukraine. However, we set a goal to present our position regarding the situation with torture and other forms of ill- treatment in the most problematic areas of human rights protection in our country in order to assist the Committee`s experts to get the fullest possible understanding of the problems in this area. In particular, our concern is the problems of impunity in the cases of torture, conflict of the prosecution functions which makes it difficult to effectively investigate the cases of torture, routine practice of violation of the rights to liberty and other rights of detainees, practice of mass violence in penal institutions, and the lack of ad- equate medical care for the persons deprived of liberty. When preparing the Shadow Report, we used the materials of monitoring of the situation of torture carried out in 2014 — 2019 in all regions of Ukraine by the Coalition of human rights
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Criminal Legal Definition of the Concept of Torture and Differential Distinction of Torture from Related Crimes
    Issue 4, 2020 Public Administration and Law Review CRIMINAL LEGAL DEFINITION OF THE CONCEPT OF TORTURE AND DIFFERENTIAL DISTINCTION OF TORTURE FROM RELATED CRIMES Alla Radzivill1 1Postgraduate student, Kyiv University of Law of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, assistant judge of the Supreme Court, Kyiv, Ukraine, e-mail: [email protected] Abstract. The article highlights the clarification and definition of criminal legal concept of torture, the study of peculiarities of this crime corpus delicti and its basic features, distinction from related categories; proposals regarding the improvement of provisions of the Criminal Code of Ukraine have been formulated. The purpose of writing this article is represented by the study and criminal legal analysis of torture (Article 127 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine), analysis of the main and qualified corpus delicti of torture under the Criminal Code of Ukraine; the identification of types, methods and ways of torture; the definition of the scientific concept of "torture" and related concepts; the determination of criteria for distinguishing the corpus delicti of torture from related crimes under the Criminal Code of Ukraine; the analysis of international legal acts aimed at protecting human rights and preventing torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; the analysis of Ukrainian national legislation in terms of its compliance with international law in the field of protection of a person from encroachment on his/her life, health, honour and dignity, which represents torture. The methodological basis of the study is represented by a set of methods and techniques of scientific knowledge, both general and special: historical, functional analysis, system-structural, formal-logical, comparative-legal, formal-legal, generalization.
    [Show full text]
  • Combating Russian Disinformation in Ukraine: Case Studies in a Market for Loyalties
    COMBATING RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION IN UKRAINE: CASE STUDIES IN A MARKET FOR LOYALTIES Monroe E. Price* & Adam P. Barry** I. INTRODUCTION This essay takes an oblique approach to the discussion of “fake news.” The approach is oblique geographically because it is not a discourse about fake news that emerges from the more frequently invoked cases centered on the United States and Western Europe, but instead relates primarily to Ukraine. It concerns the geopolitics of propaganda and associated practices of manipulation, heightened persuasion, deception, and the use of available techniques. This essay is also oblique in its approach because it deviates from the largely definitional approach – what is and what is not fake news – to the structural approach. Here, we take a leaf from the work of the (not-so) “new institutionalists,” particularly those who have studied what might be called the sociology of decision-making concerning regulations.1 This essay hypothesizes that studying modes of organizing social policy discourse ultimately can reveal or predict a great deal about the resulting policy outcomes, certainly supplementing a legal or similar analysis. Developing this form of analysis may be particularly important as societies seek to come to grips with the phenomena lumped together under the broad rubric of fake news. The process by which stakeholders assemble to determine a collective position will likely have major consequences for the * Monroe E. Price is an Adjunct Full Professor at the Annenberg School for Communication and the Joseph and Sadie Danciger Professor of Law at Cardozo School of Law. He directs the Stanhope Centre for Communications Policy Research in London, and is the Chair of the Center for Media and Communication Studies of the Central European University in Budapest.” ** Adam P.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom on the Net, Ukraine
    Ukraine https://freedomhouse.org/country/ukraine/freedom-net/2020 The COVID-19 pandemic saw the authorities prosecute users for spreading rumors online and launch several initiatives aimed at stopping the spread of the disease, including an app that monitors individuals in mandatory isolation, that infringe upon users’ privacy rights. Online journalists continued to face extralegal retaliation for their work. Cyberattacks remain a regular occurrence, affecting government and nongovernment targets alike. C1 1.00-6.00 pts0-6 pts Do the constitution or other laws fail to protect rights such as freedom of expression, access to 3.003 information, and press freedom, including on the internet, and are they enforced by a judiciary that 6.006 lacks independence? The right to free speech is granted to all citizens of Ukraine under Article 34 of the constitution, but the state may restrict this right in the interests of national security or public order, and it is sometimes restricted in practice. Article 15 of the constitution prohibits censorship.132 Ukrainian courts are hampered by corruption and political interference, and public trust in the judiciary remains low.133 Serious crimes against journalists often remain unresolved (see C7). President Zelenskyy’s administration has at times denied reporters access to information (see B5). The IMI recorded 21 COVID-19–related restrictions on the work of journalists from mid-March 2020 until the end of April 2020, including cases in which journalists were prohibited from attending government meetings or prevented from reporting.134 C2 1.00-4.00 pts0-4 pts Are there laws that assign criminal penalties or civil liability for online activities? 2.002 4.004 No dedicated law mandates criminal penalties or civil liability specifically for online activities.
    [Show full text]
  • International Crimes in Crimea
    International Crimes in Crimea: An Assessment of Two and a Half Years of Russian Occupation SEPTEMBER 2016 Contents I. Introduction 6 A. Executive summary 6 B. The authors 7 C. Sources of information and methodology of documentation 7 II. Factual Background 8 A. A brief history of the Crimean Peninsula 8 B. Euromaidan 12 C. The invasion of Crimea 15 D. Two and a half years of occupation and the war in Donbas 23 III. Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court 27 IV. Contextual elements of international crimes 28 A. War crimes 28 B. Crimes against humanity 34 V. Willful killing, murder and enforced disappearances 38 A. Overview 38 B. The law 38 C. Summary of the evidence 39 D. Documented cases 41 E. Analysis 45 F. Conclusion 45 VI. Torture and other forms of inhuman treatment 46 A. Overview 46 B. The law 46 C. Summary of the evidence 47 D. Documented cases of torture and other forms of inhuman treatment 50 E. Analysis 59 F. Conclusion 59 VII. Illegal detention 60 A. Overview 60 B. The law 60 C. Summary of the evidence 62 D. Documented cases of illegal detention 66 E. Analysis 87 F. Conclusion 87 VIII. Forced displacement 88 A. Overview 88 B. The law 88 C. Summary of evidence 90 D. Analysis 93 E. Conclusion 93 IX. Crimes against public, private and cultural property 94 A. Overview 94 B. The law 94 C. Summary of evidence 96 D. Documented cases 99 E. Analysis 110 F. Conclusion 110 X. Persecution and collective punishment 111 A. Overview 111 B.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights in Ukraine – 2005
    HUMAN RIGHTS IN UKRAINE – 2005 HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS REPORT UKRAINIAN HELSINKI HUMAN RIGHTS UNION KHARKIV HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION GROUP KHARKIV «PRAVA LUDYNY» 2006 1 BBK 67.9(4) H68 In preparing the cover, the work of Alex Savransky «Freedom is on the march» was used Designer Boris Zakharov Editors Yevgeny Zakharov, Irina Rapp, Volodymyr Yavorsky Translator Halya Coynash The book is published with the assistance of the International Renaissance Foundation and the Democracy Fund of the U.S. Embassy, Kyiv The views of the authors do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Government Human Rights in Ukraine – 2005. Report by Human Rights Organizations. / Editors H68 Y.Zakharov, I.Rapp, V.Yavorsky / Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union, Kharkiv Human Rights Protection Group – Kharkiv: Prava Ludyny, 2006. – 328 p. ISBN 966-8919-08-4. This book considers the human rights situation in Ukraine during 2005 and is based on studies by various non-governmental human rights organizations and specialists in this area. The first part gives a general assessment of state policy with regard to human rights in 2005, while in the second part each unit concentrates on identifying and analysing violations of specific rights in 2005, as well as discussing any positive moves which were made in protecting the given rights. Current legislation which encour- ages infringements of rights and freedoms is also analyzed, together with draft laws which could change the situation. The conclusions of the research contain recommendations for eliminating
    [Show full text]
  • The Kremlin's Irregular Army: Ukrainian Separatist Order of Battle
    THE KREMLIN’S IRREGULARY ARMY: UKRAINIAN SEPARATIST ORDER OF BATTLE | FRANKLIN HOLCOMB | AUGUST 2017 Franklin Holcomb September 2017 RUSSIA AND UKRAINE SECURITY REPORT 3 THE KREMLIN’S IRREGULAR ARMY: UKRAINIAN SEPARATIST ORDER OF BATTLE WWW.UNDERSTANDINGWAR.ORG 1 Cover: A Pro-Russian separatist sits at his position at Savur-Mohyla, a hill east of the city of Donetsk, August 28, 2014. REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing or from the publisher. ©2017 by the Institute for the Study of War. Published in 2017 in the United States of America by the Instittue for the Study of War. 1400 16th Street NW, Suite 515 | Washington, DC 20036 understandingwar.org 2 Franklin Holcomb The Kremlin’s Irregular Army: Ukrainian Separatist Order of Battle ABOUT THE AUTHOR Franklin Holcomb is a Russia and Ukraine Research Analyst at the Institute for the Study of War where he focuses on the war in Ukraine, Ukrainian politics, and Russian foreign policy in Eastern Europe. His current research focuses on studying the development of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the Russian-backed separatist formations operating in Eastern Ukraine, as well as analyzing Russian political and military activity in Moldova, the Baltic, and the Balkans. Mr. Holcomb is the author of “The Order of Battle of the Ukrainian Armed Forces: A Key Component in European Security,” “Moldova Update: Kremlin Will Likely Seek to Realign Chisinau”, “Ukraine Update: Russia’s Aggressive Subversion of Ukraine,” as well as ISW’s other monthly updates on the political and military situation in Ukraine.
    [Show full text]
  • Briefing for the Committee Against Torture on Ukraine
    AI Index: EUR 50/001/2007 PUBLIC To all Committee Members c/o Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights United Nations Office at Geneva CH-1211 Geneva 10 Switzerland April 2007 Briefing for the Committee against Torture on Ukraine Dear Committee Members, In view of the upcoming session of the Committee against Torture (the Committee), Amnesty International would like to take this opportunity to raise some of the organization’s concerns in relation to the implementation of the Convention against Torture in Ukraine. Despite some positive measures which have been taken in the past two years aimed at preventing torture and other ill-treatment, Amnesty International considers that many of the concerns expressed by the Committee following its examination of Ukraine’s fourth report in 2001 are still pressing and some of the Committee’s recommendations are yet to be implemented. In particular, there have been further deportations to Uzbekistan of members of the Uzbek opposition, who were at risk of torture; there continue to be allegations that police ill-treat and torture detainees with the aim of extracting confessions; the authorities fail to carry out prompt, impartial, independent and thorough investigations into allegations of torture and other ill-treatment; there is a lack of clarity about when a detained person can exercise his right to access to a lawyer, and as a result detainees are deprived of their right to legal counsel; overcrowding and a high incidence of tuberculosis in pre-trial detention centres continues to be a problem. Amnesty International is further concerned that individuals who have lodged complaints of torture or other ill-treatment have been subjected to reprisals including ill- treatment and intimidation by police in efforts to dissuade them from pursuing their complaints.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ukrainian Weekly, 2016
    ХРИСТОС НАРОДИВСЯ! CHRIST IS BORN! THEPublished U by theKRAINIAN Ukrainian National Association Inc., a fraternal W non-profit associationEEKLY Vol. LXXXIV-LXXXV No. 52-1 THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, DECEMBER 25, 2016 – SUNDAY, JANUARY 1, 2017 $2.00 Sviatoslav Karavansky, Report calls Russian artillery attacks against Ukraine prominent Soviet-era in 2014 ‘acts of war,’ as fi ghting in Donbas escalates political prisoner, dies by Mark Raczkiewycz KYIV – Russia extensively used cross- border artillery fire against Ukrainian mili- tary targets in July-September 2014 in what are considered “acts of war,” accord- ing to a new report by Bellingcat, a group of citizen journalists who use open-source investigation tools and techniques, that was released on December 21. Numbering in the “thousands,” the report says, the cross-border projectiles were the “first and strongest evidence of a direct Russian participation in the fighting.” Although they were already proven to have occurred by Ukrainian officials and the U.S. Ihor Dlaboha government, the new report analyzed the Sviatoslav Karavansky at the Ukrainian extent to which they were used in the sum- National Association in 1980. mer of 2014, when they largely contributed UUARC to stemming a Ukrainian counterattack to Serhiy Yermakov retake the border areas near Russia, and Wounded Ukrainians soldiers get evacuated some 800 meters from the frontline near PHILADELPHIA – Sviatoslav cut off and surround the occupied Donbas Luhanske, a village situated along what is known as the Rostov-on-Don highway,
    [Show full text]
  • The Right to Freedom of Speech and Opinion in Ukraine: Threats and Opportunities This Report Was Prepared by the Ukrainian Human Rights Platform “Uspishna Varta”
    ALL-UKRAINIAN ASSOCIATION "SUCCESSFUL GUARDS" Human Rights Platform uspishna-varta.com The right to freedom of speech and opinion in Ukraine: threats and opportunities This report was prepared by the Ukrainian human rights platform “Uspishna Varta”. This report assesses the observance of rights and freedoms on the territory controlled by the government of Ukraine. This report is based on data obtained by the human rights platform “Uspishna Varta” via conducting detailed interviews with victims and witnesses of human rights violations and infringements, experts and human rights defenders, as well as via carrying out activities to assist in the protection of human rights in documented cases. Among them - the monitoring of trials, advocacy work with the duty bearers on respecting human rights, non-governmental organizations, and the media. General recommendations on the right to freedom of speech and opinion in Ukraine In order to ensure the right to freedom of speech and opinion enshrined in Article 34 of the Constitution of Ukraine, as well as in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by the state of Ukraine, the following measures should be taken. The President of Ukraine: 1. To take measures to stop pressure being put on the media and provide explanations for the intervention of the head of state or his subordinates in the activities of issuing licenses and the organization of media inspections. 2. Recall the representatives of the National Council of Ukraine on Television and Radio Broadcasting, appointed by the quota of the President.
    [Show full text]
  • ∗2004181∗ A/Hrc/43/Crp.7
    A/HRC/43/CRP.7 18 March 2020 Original: English Human Rights Council Forty-third session 24 February–20 March 2020 Agenda item 10 Technical assistance and capacity-building Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine (16 November 2019–15 February 2020)* * Reproduced as received in the language of submission only. GE.20-04181(E) ∗2004181∗ A/HRC/43/CRP.7 2 A/HRC/43/CRP.7 I. Executive summary 1. This twenty-ninth report by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on the human rights situation in Ukraine covers the situation from 16 November 2019 to 15 February 2020. It is based on the work of the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU).1 2. During the reporting period, OHCHR recorded two civilian deaths (both men) and 17 civilian injuries (13 men, three women, and one boy), a 54.8 per cent decrease compared with the previous reporting period (six killed and 36 injured). The total civilian casualties recorded in 2019 (27 killed and 140 injured) were 40.6 per cent lower than in 2018 (55 killed and 226 injured), and were the lowest annual civilian casualty figures for the entire conflict period. 3. Parliament continued to develop draft laws on remedy and reparation for deaths and injuries of civilians, and for the loss of property, including housing, which could lead to a comprehensive state policy of remedy and reparation to civilian victims of the conflict.2 This has been lacking since 2014. 4. The armed conflict continued to negatively impact the enjoyment of economic and social rights by the civilian population, especially the more than five million residents of the conflict-affected area and internally displaced persons (IDPs).3 Children, older persons and persons in vulnerable situations are at increased risk of being left behind in achieving sustainable development because of the conflict.
    [Show full text]
  • Association Agreement with Ukraine
    European Parliament 2019-2024 TEXTS ADOPTED P9_TA(2021)0050 EU Association Agreement with Ukraine European Parliament resolution of 11 February 2021 on the implementation of the EU Association Agreement with Ukraine (2019/2202(INI)) The European Parliament, – having regard to Article 8 and Title V, notably Articles 21, 22, 36, 37 and 49, of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), as well as Part Five of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), – having regard to the Association Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part, including a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (AA/DCFTA), which entered into force on 1 September 2017, and to the related Association Agenda, – having regard to the entry into force on 11 June 2017 of a visa-free regime for citizens of Ukraine, as a result of the amendments to Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 made by the European Parliament and the Council, – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2018/1806 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 November 2018 listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from their requirement1, – having regard to its previous resolutions relating to Ukraine, in particular those of 12 December 2018 on the implementation of the EU Association Agreement with Ukraine2, and of 21 January 2016 on Association Agreements / Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine3, as well as to its recommendation of 19 June 2020 to the Council, the Commission and the Vice- President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on the Eastern Partnership, in the run-up to the June 2020 Summit4, 1 OJ L 303, 28.11.2018, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Country Information and Guidance Ukraine: Background Information, Including Actors of Protection and Internal Relocation
    Country Information and Guidance Ukraine: Background information, including actors of protection and internal relocation Version 1.0 August 2016 Preface This document provides country of origin information (COI) and guidance to Home Office decision makers on handling particular types of protection and human rights claims. This includes whether claims are likely to justify the granting of asylum, humanitarian protection or discretionary leave and whether – in the event of a claim being refused – it is likely to be certifiable as ‘clearly unfounded’ under s94 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. Decision makers must consider claims on an individual basis, taking into account the case specific facts and all relevant evidence, including: the guidance contained with this document; the available COI; any applicable caselaw; and the Home Office casework guidance in relation to relevant policies. Country Information The COI within this document has been compiled from a wide range of external information sources (usually) published in English. Consideration has been given to the relevance, reliability, accuracy, objectivity, currency, transparency and traceability of the information and wherever possible attempts have been made to corroborate the information used across independent sources, to ensure accuracy. All sources cited have been referenced in footnotes. It has been researched and presented with reference to the Common EU [European Union] Guidelines for Processing Country of Origin Information (COI), dated April 2008, and the European Asylum Support Office’s research guidelines, Country of Origin Information report methodology, dated July 2012. Feedback Our goal is to continuously improve the guidance and information we provide. Therefore, if you would like to comment on this document, please email the Country Policy and Information Team.
    [Show full text]