The court granted the motion filed by Alexander Shadrin, a partner at Barristers, JSC, to release the defendant in a high-profile contract killing case from custody and place him under house arrest.

The young man, born in 1996, is charged with committing a crime under Part 5 of Article 27, paragraphs 6 and 11, and paragraph 12 of Part 2 of Article 115 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine—aiding and abetting the commission of an intentional contract killing for financial gain by a group of persons acting in concert—a provision carrying a penalty of up to life imprisonment.

The motion filed by Alexander Shadrin, a partner at Barristers, defense attorney Alexander Shadrin, to change the pretrial detention measure is justified by the fact that during the 1.5 years the defendant has spent in the pretrial detention center, his health has deteriorated, and the facility has taken no measures to provide adequate medical care.

According to the established case law of the European Court of Human Rights, such a situation constitutes inhuman treatment and a violation of Article 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The European Court notes that the health of prisoners must be adequately protected (“Barilo v. Ukraine,” judgment of May 16, 2013, No. 9607/06, §66; “Davydov and Others v. Ukraine,” judgment of June 1, 2010, Nos. 17674/02, 39081/02, §294, et al.).

This outcome was made possible by the defense’s systematic and persistent motions, ensuring that the client received consultations from independent medical professionals while in pretrial detention, numerous appeals to investigating judges to halt human rights violations pursuant to Article 206 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, as well as to law enforcement agencies regarding acts of torture, and appeals and communications with the European Court of Human Rights requesting urgent interim measures.

The Kyiv-Svyatoshyn District Court of the Kyiv Region ruled that further violations of the defendant’s rights to life and health were inconsistent with the objectives of criminal proceedings, and the defendant will now be able to defend his innocence while under the care of qualified medical personnel.