The European Court of Human Rights has officially notified the defense team in the case of Dmytro Ryumshyn that it has begun reviewing our complaint.
This means that in Strasbourg—unlike in Ukrainian courts—our complaint was not merely read but was deemed sufficiently well-founded to prompt the European Court to pose several uncomfortable questions to the Ukrainian government.
The complaint to the ECHR is based on gross violations of fundamental rights committed by the national courts.
We argue that there was a violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (the right to liberty and security of person), because:
- The detention was unjustified. The courts did not present any real evidence of the risks cited by the prosecutor and ignored the possibility of personal surety provided by members of parliament.
- An excessive bail amount was set. The courts set astronomical bail amounts (90.8 UAH), which exceed the statutory limits by hundreds of times, and failed to explain why the case was “exceptional.” At the same time, evidence regarding the actual financial situation of Dmytro and his family was completely ignored.
We also allege a violation of Article 6, § 1 of the Convention (the right to a fair trial), because:
- The court hearings were unjustifiably closed to the public. Citing the formal existence of “confidentiality,” the courts deprived the public of the opportunity to hear the defense’s position. This allowed the prosecution to create a false impression in society regarding an alleged “corruption element,” which is not even included in the official charges against Dmytro.
This is clear evidence that when justice at the local level turns into a farce, one must appeal to higher courts. And, as we can see, sometimes they do open their doors.
Partner at Partner Barristers Andriy Yosypov, attorney Bohdan Zabara, and lawyer Günay Alizade are working on the case.
Author: Barristers
