{"id":14292,"date":"2021-04-06T08:08:01","date_gmt":"2021-04-06T08:08:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/laweuro.com\/?p=14292"},"modified":"2021-04-06T08:08:01","modified_gmt":"2021-04-06T08:08:01","slug":"case-of-farziyev-and-others-v-ukraine-european-court-of-human-rights-applications-nos-63747-14-and-23-others-see-appended-list","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/laweuro.com\/?p=14292","title":{"rendered":"CASE OF FARZIYEV AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE (European Court of Human Rights) Applications nos. 63747\/14 and 23 others \u2013 see appended list"},"content":{"rendered":"

The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.\u00a0The applicants complained under Article 3 of the Convention of their life sentence with no prospect of release.<\/p>\n

FIFTH SECTION
\nCASE OF FARZIYEV AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE<\/strong>
\n(Applications nos. 63747\/14 and 23 others \u2013 see appended list)<\/em>
\nJUDGMENT
\nSTRASBOURG
\n1 April 2021<\/p>\n

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.<\/p>\n

In the case of Farziyevand Others v. Ukraine,<\/strong><\/p>\n

The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:<\/p>\n

Ivana Jeli\u0107, President,
\nGanna Yudkivska,
\nArnfinn B\u00e5rdsen, judges,
\nand Liv Tigerstedt, Deputy Section Registrar,<\/p>\n

Having deliberated in private on 11 March 2021,<\/p>\n

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:<\/p>\n

PROCEDURE<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. The case originated in applications against Ukraine lodged with the Court under Article\u00a034 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (\u201cthe Convention\u201d) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.<\/p>\n

2. The Ukrainian Government (\u201cthe Government\u201d) were given notice of the applications.<\/p>\n

THE FACTS<\/strong><\/p>\n

3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.<\/p>\n

4. The applicants complained under Article 3 of the Convention of their life sentence with no prospect of release.<\/p>\n

THE LAW<\/strong><\/p>\n

I. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS<\/p>\n

5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.<\/p>\n

II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3of the Convention<\/p>\n

6. The applicants complained of their life sentence with no prospect of release.They relied, expressly or in substance, on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:<\/p>\n

Article 3<\/p>\n

\u201cNo one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.\u201d<\/p>\n

7. The Court reiterates that the Convention does not prohibit the imposition of a life sentence on those convicted of especially serious crimes, such as murder. Yet to be compatible with Article 3 such a sentence must be reduciblede jureandde facto, meaning that there must be both a prospect of release for the prisoner and a possibility of review. The basis of such review must extend to assessing whether there are legitimate penological grounds for the continuing incarceration of the prisoner. These grounds include punishment, deterrence, public protection and rehabilitation. The balance between them is not necessarily static and may shift in the course of a sentence, so that the primary justification for detention at the outset may not be so after a lengthy period of service of sentence. The importance of the ground of rehabilitation is underlined, since it is here that the emphasis of European penal policy now lies, as reflected in the practice of the Contracting States, in the relevant standards adopted by the Council of Europe, and in the relevant international materials (see Vinter and Othersv.\u00a0the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 66069\/09 and 2 others, \u00a7\u00a7\u00a059-81, ECHR\u00a02013 (extracts)).<\/p>\n

8. In the leading case of Petukhov v. Ukraine (no. 2) (no. 41216\/13, 12\u00a0March 2019), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.<\/p>\n

9. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. They are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article\u00a03 of the Convention.<\/p>\n

III. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE\u00a041 OF THE CONVENTION<\/p>\n

10. Article 41 of the Convention provides:<\/p>\n

\u201cIf the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.\u201d<\/p>\n

11. Having regard to its case\u2011law (see, in particular, Petukhov (no. 2), cited above, \u00a7\u00a0201), the Court considers that the finding of a violation constitutes in itself sufficient just satisfaction.<\/p>\n

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,<\/strong><\/p>\n

1. Decides to join the applications;<\/p>\n

2. Declares the applications admissible;<\/p>\n

3. Holds that they disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention;<\/p>\n

4. Holds that the finding of a violation constitutes in itself sufficient just satisfaction.<\/p>\n

Done in English, and notified in writing on 1 April 2021, pursuant to Rule\u00a077\u00a0\u00a7\u00a7\u00a02 and\u00a03 of the Rules of Court.<\/p>\n

Liv Tigerstedt\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Ivana Jeli\u0107<\/p>\n

Deputy Registrar\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0President<\/p>\n

____________<\/p>\n

APPENDIX
\nList of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention
\n(life sentence with no prospect of release)<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
No.<\/strong><\/td>\nApplication no.<\/strong>
\nDate of introduction<\/strong><\/td>\n		Applicant\u2019s name<\/strong>
\nYear of birth<\/strong><\/td>\n		Representative\u2019s name and location<\/strong><\/td>\nName of the trial court<\/strong>
\nDate of the life sentence<\/strong><\/td>\n		Judicial decision upholding the conviction<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
1.<\/td>\n63747\/14
\n29\/08\/2014<\/td>\n		Rustam Zakirovich FARZIYEV<\/strong>
\n1984<\/td>\n		Avramenko Gennadiy Mykolayovych
\nChernigiv<\/td>\n		Chernigiv Regional Court of Appeal
\n09\/08\/2004<\/td>\n		Supreme Court of Ukraine 16\/11\/2004<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2.<\/td>\n43270\/15
\n20\/10\/2015<\/td>\n		Vasyl Mykolayovych IVASHCHENKO<\/strong>
\n1961<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nCherkasy Regional Court of Appeal
\n28\/01\/2002<\/td>\n		Supreme Court of Ukraine 09\/07\/2002<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
3.<\/td>\n1212\/16
\n11\/12\/2015<\/td>\n		Viktor Ivanovych GOGIN<\/strong>
\n1949<\/td>\n		Kapalkina Yevgeniya Olegivna
\nKyiv<\/td>\n		Court of Appeal of Crimea 30\/11\/2004<\/td>\nSupreme Court of Ukraine 28\/05\/2005<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
4.<\/td>\n3676\/16
\n04\/01\/2016<\/td>\n		Daniel Boleslavovych SUKHARSKYY<\/strong>
\n1981<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nKhmelnytskyy Regional Court of Appeal
\n21\/03\/2002<\/td>\n		Supreme Court of Ukraine 17\/09\/2002<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
5.<\/td>\n4942\/16
\n15\/12\/2015<\/td>\n		Volodymyr Sergiyovych PEREGUDOV<\/strong>
\n1989<\/td>\n		Zayets Sergiy Anatoliyovych
\nIrpin<\/td>\n		Zolotoniskyy Local Court of Cherkasy Region
\n15\/08\/2012<\/td>\n		High Specialised Court for Civil and Criminal Matters 17\/12\/2013<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
6.<\/td>\n45265\/16
\n20\/07\/2016<\/td>\n		Vitaliy Yevgenovych BARANENKO<\/strong>
\n1976<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nOdessa Regional Court 10\/11\/2000<\/td>\nSupreme Court of Ukraine 21\/06\/2001<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
7.<\/td>\n50668\/16
\n26\/09\/2016<\/td>\n		Mykola Pavlovych SERVETNYK<\/strong>
\n1967<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nVolyn Regional Court
\n23\/02\/1998<\/td>\n		Supreme Court of Ukraine 31\/03\/1998<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
8.<\/td>\n56273\/16
\n21\/09\/2016<\/td>\n		Yevgen Mykolayovych AN<\/strong>
\n1967<\/td>\n		Poznyak Oleksandr Mykolayovych
\nKyiv<\/td>\n		Court of Appeal of Crimea 22\/02\/2006<\/td>\nSupreme Court of Ukraine 04\/05\/2006<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
9.<\/td>\n58897\/16
\n01\/10\/2015<\/td>\n		Viktor Pavlovych LAVRENYUK<\/strong>
\n1977<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nRivne Regional Court of Appeal 01\/04\/2005<\/td>\nSupreme Court of Ukraine 22\/09\/2005<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
10.<\/td>\n58985\/16
\n22\/09\/2016<\/td>\n		Anatoliy Oleksandrovych LUZHYNETSKYY<\/strong>
\n1972<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nTernopil Regional Court
\n21\/09\/2000<\/td>\n		Supreme Court of Ukraine 12\/12\/2000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
11.<\/td>\n38459\/17
\n26\/06\/2017<\/td>\n		Nikolay Vladimirovich SUZKO<\/strong>
\n1978<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nDnipropetrovsk Regional Court of Appeal
\n17\/07\/2006
\nZaporizhzhya Regional Court of Appeal
\n09\/03\/2010<\/td>\n		Supreme Court of Ukraine 30\/01\/2007
\nSupreme Court of Ukraine 01\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
12.<\/td>\n44620\/17
\n02\/06\/2017<\/td>\n		Mikhail Igorevich BELYAYEV<\/strong>
\n1981<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nSumy Regional Court of Appeal 14\/04\/2003<\/td>\nSupreme Court of Ukraine 02\/09\/2003<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
13.<\/td>\n64484\/17
\n07\/11\/2017<\/td>\n		Vadim Valeryevich MESTROPYAN<\/strong>
\n1971<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nMoskovskyy Local Court of Kharkiv
\n28\/02\/2013<\/td>\n		Higher Specialised Civil and Criminal Court of Ukraine 10\/06\/2014<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
14.<\/td>\n74946\/17
\n13\/10\/2017<\/td>\n		Oleg Mykhaylovych KAZAK<\/strong>
\n1981<\/td>\n		Kapalkina Yevgeniya Olegivna
\nKyiv<\/td>\n		Odesa Regional Court of Appeal 13\/04\/2005<\/td>\nSupreme Court of Ukraine 05\/07\/2005<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
15.<\/td>\n77389\/17
\n01\/11\/2017<\/td>\n		Sergey Petrovich KUNITSKIY<\/strong>
\n1968<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nLugansk Regional Court of Appeal
\n01\/08\/2002<\/td>\n		Supreme Court of Ukraine 08\/04\/2003<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
16.<\/td>\n78615\/17
\n26\/10\/2017<\/td>\n		Anatoliy Anatolyevich KOTKO<\/strong>
\n1973<\/td>\n		Bespala Tamila Sergiyivna
\nKharkiv<\/td>\n		Dnipropetrovsk Regional Court of Appeal
\n03\/08\/2004<\/td>\n		Supreme Court of Ukraine 07\/12\/2004<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
17.<\/td>\n78638\/17
\n26\/10\/2017<\/td>\n		Viktor Petrovych SKRYNNYK<\/strong>
\n1957<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nSumy Regional Court of Appeal 06\/07\/2004<\/td>\nSupreme Court of Ukraine 19\/10\/2004<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
18.<\/td>\n78644\/17
\n26\/10\/2017<\/td>\n		Albert Ivanovich AGUREYEV<\/strong>
\n1963<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nLuhansk Regional Court of 29\/05\/1998<\/td>\nSupreme Court of Ukraine 25\/08\/1998<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
19.<\/td>\n81641\/17
\n29\/11\/2017<\/td>\n		Gennadiy Mykhaylovych NOGTYEV<\/strong>
\n1975<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nKyiv Local Court
\n02\/06\/1997<\/td>\n		Supreme Court of Ukraine 31\/07\/1997<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
20.<\/td>\n82615\/17
\n02\/02\/2018<\/td>\n		Ruslan Mikhaylovich PETRENKO<\/strong>
\n1978<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nChernigiv Regional Court of Appeal
\n05\/03\/2010<\/td>\n		Supreme Court of Ukraine 06\/07\/2010<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
21.<\/td>\n84505\/17
\n09\/12\/2017<\/td>\n		Vitaliy Vasilyevich KOSHIK<\/strong>
\n1981<\/td>\n		Bespala Tamila Sergiyivna
\nKharkiv<\/td>\n		Dnipropetrovsk Regional Court of Appeal
\n16\/07\/2004<\/td>\n		Supreme Court of Ukraine 14\/12\/2004<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
22.<\/td>\n38805\/18
\n01\/08\/2018<\/td>\n		Oleksandr Mykolayovych GUBARYEV<\/strong>
\n1979<\/td>\n		<\/td>\nSumy Regional Court of Appeal 30\/08\/2002<\/td>\nSupreme Court of Ukraine 18\/03\/2003<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
23.<\/td>\n16992\/20
\n17\/03\/2020<\/td>\n		Anatoliy Anatoliyovych BALYK<\/strong>
\n1969<\/td>\n		Khaytov Pavlo Vyacheslavovych
\nChernigiv<\/td>\n		Kotovskyy City Court of Odessa Region,
\n18\/02\/2011<\/td>\n		N\/A<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
24.<\/td>\n22467\/20
\n19\/05\/2020<\/td>\n		Vladyslav Yaroslavovych LOZINSKYY<\/strong>
\n1974<\/td>\n		Revyakin Maksym Oleksandrovych
\nKharkiv<\/td>\n		Kmelnytsk Regional Court of Appeal
\n07\/09\/2006<\/td>\n		Supreme Court of Ukraine 27\/02\/2007<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n