On October 24, 2019, the European Court of Human Rights issued a judgment in the case of “Shtepa v. Ukraine” (Application No. 16349/17), in which it found a violation of Article 5(3) and Article 6(1) of the Convention with respect to the applicant.

During its examination of the case, the Court noted that the domestic courts had repeatedly justified the applicant’s continued detention by citing the absence of grounds for her release, whereas Article 5(3) of the Convention prescribes the opposite approach and requires national authorities to specify the grounds for continuing pretrial detention.

The Court noted that, without referring to specific facts or considering alternatives to pretrial detention and generally relying on the seriousness of the charges, the authorities continued to keep the applicant in pretrial detention on grounds that cannot be considered “sufficient” and “relevant” to justify its duration.

The decision also refers to the fact that the Court has frequently found violations of Article 5(3) of the Convention in cases against Ukraine, on the grounds that, even during prolonged periods of detention, the domestic courts relied on the same set of grounds throughout the entire period of pretrial detention.

Particular attention should be paid to the Court’s conclusion that national courts have a duty to conduct their proceedings in such a way as to ensure they are prompt and effective. However, in the Court’s view, the national court did not act with due diligence in this case. In particular, according to information provided by the Government, hearings were often scheduled at intervals of three to four weeks, and on six occasions hearings were postponed due to the failure of witnesses to appear in court. The Government did not indicate whether any measures had been taken to shorten the intervals between hearings or to discipline the absent witnesses.

As a result of the proceedings, the court also ordered the payment of compensation to Neli Shtepa in the total amount of 3,600 euros.

A translation of this decision will be published on our website shortly.

Currently, the text of the decision is available at the following link