1. Essence of the decision:
The European Court of Human Rights found Ukraine violated Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention regarding the death of a young man in police custody in 2010. The Court determined that Ukraine failed to conduct an effective investigation into the death and ill-treatment of the victim, and failed to provide a plausible explanation for the injuries and death that occurred while he was in police custody. The Court awarded €40,000 in non-pecuniary damages and €3,000 for costs and expenses to the victim’s parents.
2. Structure and main provisions:
The decision is structured around examining both procedural and substantive aspects of Articles 2 and 3 violations:
– The Court found the investigation was ineffective due to significant delays (over 8.5 years), failure to establish crucial circumstances of death, and inadequate investigative measures
– The Court emphasized the State’s duty to protect persons in custody and provide plausible explanations for injuries sustained while in custody
– The decision established that the burden of proof rests with authorities to explain injuries and death occurring during detention
– The Court rejected the government’s non-exhaustion of domestic remedies objection due to the investigation’s ineffectiveness
3. Key provisions for use:
– The Court reaffirmed that investigations must be prompt and expeditious to maintain public confidence
– The decision emphasizes that authorities have a particularly stringent obligation to account for the treatment of individuals who die in custody
– The Court established that strong presumptions of fact arise when events occur within the exclusive knowledge of authorities during custody
– The failure to provide explanations for injuries and death in custody indicates a failure of the State to discharge its burden of proof
– The Court confirmed that investigation effectiveness is measured by adequacy of investigative measures, promptness, family involvement, and independence
