ECHR Lawyers Ukraine: Human Rights Applications for Ukrainians

Ukraine is at the centre of some of the most significant and complex human rights litigation currently before the European Court of Human Rights. From Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the conflict in Donbas that began the same year, to the full-scale Russian invasion launched on 24 February 2022, tens of thousands of Ukrainians have experienced violations of their most fundamental rights — including the right to life, the prohibition of torture, the right to a fair trial, and the right to peaceful enjoyment of property.

Our specialist ECHR lawyers advise and represent Ukrainian applicants before the European Court of Human Rights. We handle individual applications arising from war-related violations, Crimea annexation cases, Donbas conflict cases, and violations by Ukrainian state authorities. We also advise on the current status and processing of Ukrainian cases at the Court.

Ukraine v. Russia: Interstate Cases at the European Court

Ukraine has brought a series of interstate applications against Russia before the European Court of Human Rights — one of the most significant bodies of interstate litigation in the Court’s history. These cases represent the formal assertion by Ukraine as a state that Russia has violated Convention rights on a systematic and widespread basis.

In the landmark Grand Chamber judgment of Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia (25 January 2023), the Court found that Russia had exercised extraterritorial jurisdiction over Crimea from 27 February 2014 and over parts of Donbas from May 2014 due to its effective control and military presence in those areas. In relation to the full-scale 2022 invasion, the Court found that Russia’s attacks placed affected civilians across Ukraine under its jurisdiction. Russia was also found to have breached its obligation under Article 38 of the Convention to cooperate with the Court by refusing to engage with proceedings.

A second major interstate judgment — Ukraine v. Russia (re Crimea), Grand Chamber, 25 June 2024 — found unanimously that Russia was responsible for an administrative practice of violations of virtually all substantive Convention rights in Crimea since the annexation in 2014. The Court found that Russia had unlawfully replaced Ukraine’s judicial system with the Russian system in Crimea without justification under international humanitarian law, violating Article 6 of the Convention. This judgment is historic in its scope and paves the way for individual victims in Crimea to pursue their own claims.

A further case addressing the conflict in eastern Ukraine (application no. 8019/16) identified admissible complaints concerning abductions of children and adults by Russian-backed forces in Donbas, and other administrative practices affecting the civilian population. Following the interstate judgments, the Court’s Registry can now begin advancing the thousands of individual applications from eastern Ukraine that were pending the interstate determinations.

Individual Applications from Crimea and Donbas

As of the most recent public data, approximately 9,500 individual applications are pending at the European Court arising from Russia’s war against Ukraine — including applications from Crimea relating to annexation-related violations and applications from Donbas relating to the armed conflict and separatist occupation from 2014 onwards.

These individual cases cover an enormous range of Convention violations:

• Unlawful killings and deaths in conflict, raising Article 2 (right to life) claims
• Torture and inhuman treatment in detention facilities operated by Russian-backed forces, raising Article 3 claims
• Arbitrary arrest and detention without adequate legal basis or judicial review, raising Article 5 claims
• Prosecutions before Russian-imposed courts in Crimea without adequate fair trial guarantees, raising Article 6 claims
• Forced imposition of Russian citizenship and persecution based on Ukrainian identity, raising Articles 8, 14, and Protocol 1 Article 2 claims
• Property confiscation and destruction, raising Protocol 1, Article 1 (peaceful enjoyment of possessions) claims
• Restrictions on education in the Ukrainian language, raising Protocol 1, Article 2 (right to education) claims

War Crimes and Article 2: The Right to Life

Article 2 of the Convention — the right to life — places both a negative obligation on states not to kill unlawfully and a positive obligation to investigate any death that may involve state responsibility. In the context of Russia’s war against Ukraine, Article 2 is engaged by:

The downing of MH17 on 17 July 2014 over eastern Ukraine, killing all 298 persons on board, features prominently in the interstate cases. The Court found that Russia supplied the Buk missile system used to shoot down the aircraft and failed to conduct any adequate investigation — a finding of procedural violation of Article 2 with profound implications for accountability.

Individual attacks on civilian populations during the 2022 invasion — including missile strikes on residential areas, attacks on civilian infrastructure, and the killings documented in Bucha, Mariupol, and other locations — raise Article 2 claims where they can be attributed to Russian state forces. The Court applied Rule 39 interim measures in March 2022, ordering Russia to refrain from military attacks on the civilian population — an order Russia ignored.

For applicants bringing Article 2 claims, it is essential to document the circumstances of the killing or death as fully as possible, identify the responsible parties, and demonstrate that no effective investigation has been conducted at domestic level. Our lawyers can advise on the documentation requirements for Article 2 cases.

Article 3: Torture and Ill-Treatment in the War Context

There is extensive documentation of torture and inhuman treatment of Ukrainian prisoners of war and civilian detainees by Russian forces during the 2022 invasion. These cases — including beatings, electrocution, mock executions, and other forms of severe mistreatment in filtration camps and detention facilities — raise Article 3 claims against Russia.

The Court’s jurisdiction over events in the conflict zone is governed by the extraterritorial jurisdiction principles established in the interstate cases. Where Russian forces exercised effective control over an individual through capture or detention, Article 3 applies to their treatment.

Property Destruction and Protocol 1, Article 1

Widespread destruction of homes, businesses, and other property during the conflict raises claims under Protocol 1, Article 1 of the Convention (the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions). This provision has been applied by the Court in previous conflict cases to require states to provide compensation for property destroyed or confiscated without legal justification. In Crimea, the systematic expropriation of Ukrainian state and private property under Russian occupation is addressed in the interstate admissibility decisions as part of the pattern of administrative violations.

Current Status of Ukraine Cases at the European Court

The European Court’s jurisdiction over violations by Russia in Ukraine was confined to events occurring before 16 September 2022 — the date on which Russia’s obligations under the Convention ceased following its expulsion from the Council of Europe. Applications submitted by individual Ukrainian applicants before 16 September 2022, or concerning events before that date, fall within the Court’s jurisdiction.

A Resolution adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 22 March 2022 clarified that the Court retains jurisdiction to examine violations committed by Russia up to 16 September 2022. Processing of individual applications from Ukraine has been supported by the completion of key interstate admissibility decisions, which provide the jurisdictional and factual framework within which individual cases will be examined.

For violations occurring after 16 September 2022, the European Court is no longer the primary forum. Alternative international mechanisms — including the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine, the International Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice, and future special international courts — may provide avenues for accountability. Our lawyers can advise on all available mechanisms relevant to your specific circumstances.

How Our ECHR Lawyers Help Ukrainian Applicants

We provide comprehensive legal support to Ukrainian applicants:

• Case assessment — We evaluate your case against the relevant Convention articles and assess whether it falls within the Court’s jurisdiction (pre-16 September 2022)
• Evidence gathering advice — We advise on the documentation needed to support claims under Articles 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, and Protocol 1, Article 1
• Application preparation — We draft complete applications including factual narratives, legal analysis, and just satisfaction claims
• Admissibility assessment — We check all admissibility criteria, including the four-month deadline from the date of the final relevant event or decision
• Alternative remedies advice — For post-September 2022 violations, we advise on all available international and domestic mechanisms

If you are a Ukrainian national or resident affected by human rights violations in the context of Russia’s war, contact us today for a free initial consultation. You can also read our guide to filing a complaint to the ECHR and our page on ECHR admissibility criteria.