“The European Court of Human Rights made a large -scale decision on a number of lawsuits on the inaction of Ukraine during the clash of pro -Russian and pro -Ukrainian activists in Odessa on May 2, 2014, when 47 people were killed.”, – WRITE: www.pravda.com.ua
Source: “European Truth” with reference to court decision
Details: The court acknowledged that those events were largely caused by Russian propaganda, at the same time he stressed that there were also violations by Ukraine, which should pay compensation.
Advertising:
The ECtHR decision concerns the events of May 2, 2014, which began with the attack of pro -Russian separatists from the so -called “Antimaidan” on the participants of the pro -Ukrainian demonstration.
The clashes and murder of the participants of the pro -Ukrainian gait later led to the assault by the atymaydan camp by the Kulikovo field, and a fire at the Trade Union House, which died several dozen Antimaidan supporters.
Relatives 25 killed that day, as well as 3 people who survived after the fire, filed several lawsuits to Strasbourg.
Among the plaintiffs are relatives of 2 pro -Ukrainian activists who died of gunshot wounds. Another 3 in the media is more commonly identified as “random passers -by”, which also received fatal gunshot wounds. The rest are participants of the “antimaidan” group and relatives of the victims who found themselves in the burning house of trade unions. However, the court stressed that it did not identify them by ideological preferences.
Despite the differences in the views of the participants of those events, all the plaintiffs made claims against Ukraine because of its inaction – they say, the state could prevent tragic consequences.
However, the court several times stressed in the body of the decision and in his conclusions that the priority of the events is Russia and its activity in the destabilization of Ukraine.
“The Court considers that misinformation and propaganda by Russia played a role in tragic events … an unjustified wave of violence preceded the constant spread of aggressive and emotionally colored misinformation and propaganda about new Ukrainian authorities and Maidan supporters from Russian power.”
Another point at which the court decided to emphasize separately is that many Odessa officials responsible for violations from Ukraine soon “fled to Russia, received Russian citizenship and even built a career there against the backdrop of a Russian large -scale military invasion of Ukraine.”
However, it does not remove responsibility from Ukraine as a state, says the ECtHR. The court also stressed that even later, Ukraine did not try to pursue officials whose actions led to numerous casualties.
Yes, the court stressed that the Odesa police “did almost nothing” to prevent attack on protesters that took place with the use of firearms. In particular, it has ignored numerous prompt information on the preparation of clutter, says the ECtHR with reference to available confirmation of this.
“The main duty of the authorities was to do everything possible to prevent the risk of violence,” the court said, stressed that the Ukrainian authorities were weak against the background of Russian aggression in Crimea and Donbass, did not deprive the state of the opportunity to act. Deputy Head of Regional Police, Vladimir Fuuji later fled to Russia.
The Court also considers that “the fire truck was trapped in a fire scene for 40 minutes, and the police did not intervene to help evacuate people” from the Trade Union House.
The head of the Regional Directorate of the SES Volodymyr Bodelan, who personally instructed not to send the cars to extinguish the fire, for two years fled to Russia, but during his stay in Odessa against him did not even initiate a criminal case.
The ECtHR also acknowledged that local authorities, under the guise of “cleaning” deliberately destroyed the evidence at the tragedy.
In view of this, the court found Ukraine guilty of violating the article of the European Convention on Human Rights on the Right to Life. The Ukrainian state has to pay 15 thousand euros compensation to the relatives of each of the dead, 12 thousand – three plaintiffs who survived but suffered serious burns.
The highest compensation, 17 thousand euros, will receive the daughter of Mikhail Vyacheslav, who burned down at the Trade Union House, as she also complained about the unjustified long -term refusal of the authorities to issue her father’s body for burial.
Russia was not a party to the claim of plaintiffs.
The ECtHR also considers cases against the Russian Federation – yes, last year, Russia defeated the case in the ECtHR to violate human rights in Crimea.
Earlier, the Council of Europe stated that they demanding that Russia stop repression in the occupied Crimea.