1. Essence of the decision:
The European Court of Human Rights ruled in the case of Bilyy v. Ukraine concerning the ill-treatment of the applicant by police convoy officers in 2016, when he sustained a head injury while consulting case files on court premises. The Court found Ukraine in violation of Article 3 of the Convention (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) in both its procedural and substantive aspects, as the state failed to provide a plausible explanation for the applicant’s injuries and conducted an ineffective investigation.
2. Structure and main provisions:
The decision outlines the factual background of the incident, presents conflicting accounts from the applicant and police officers, and details the subsequent investigation process. The Court examined two main aspects:
– The substantive violation of Article 3 due to the unexplained head injury sustained while under police control
– The procedural violation due to ineffective investigation, characterized by:
* Failure to grant the applicant victim status
* Three identical decisions to discontinue investigation
* Lack of proper verification of the convoy officers’ version of events
* Insufficient investigative measures
3. Key provisions for practical use:
– The Court established that when a person sustains injuries while under police control, the State bears responsibility for providing a plausible explanation
– The decision reinforces the standard that a credible allegation of ill-treatment triggers the state’s obligation to conduct an effective investigation
– The Court awarded €15,000 in non-pecuniary damages and €1,000 for costs and expenses
– The decision highlights specific investigative deficiencies that make an investigation ineffective: relying solely on police accounts, failing to grant victim status, and making repeated identical decisions despite court criticism
