1. Essence of the decision in 3-5 sentences:
The case concerns the mass disorder and fire in Odesa on May 2, 2014, which resulted in 48 deaths and numerous injuries. The Court found that Ukraine violated Article 2 of the Convention by failing to prevent and stop the violence, ensure timely rescue measures, and conduct an effective investigation into the events. The Court also found a violation of Article 8 in respect of one applicant due to unjustified delay in releasing her father’s body for burial.
2. Structure and main provisions:
The decision examines:
– The role of the Court in assessing Ukraine’s international responsibility
– Violations of Article 2 (right to life) in its substantive and procedural aspects
– Violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life)
– Just satisfaction awards to the applicants
Key changes compared to previous decisions:
– Detailed analysis of state responsibility in complex situations involving both state and non-state actors
– Consideration of broader geopolitical context while focusing on specific state obligations
– Emphasis on importance of effective investigations in politically sensitive cases
3. Most important provisions for use:
– State’s positive obligations to prevent violence and protect life extend beyond specific threats to general protection of society
– Requirements for effective investigation: adequacy, promptness, independence, victim involvement and public scrutiny
– State responsibility exists even when wrongdoings are attributable to former officials who later fled the country
– Importance of considering general context while focusing on specific state obligations
– Need for enhanced public scrutiny in cases involving serious human rights violations and politically sensitive issues
The decision provides important guidance on state obligations in complex situations involving mass disorder, politically motivated violence, and the need for effective investigations regardless of political sensitivities.
