On July 3, the European Court for Human Rights announced that the case of the former Interior Minister Yuriy Lutsenko contains a number of violations of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms to which Ukraine subscribes.
The court ruled that the oppositional politician was “arbitrarily and unlawfully arrested and detained, that the lawfulness of his arrest and detention had not been properly reviewed by the domestic courts – both the first instance and the appeal court.”
Moreover, the court recognized that the illegal jailing of Lutsenko was caused by political motives, with the aim of removing him from the political scene, particularly on the eve of the Oct. 28 parliamentary election.
The European Court has only acknowledged political prosecution a few times. The decision in the case of Lutsenko, still subject to appeals, is not only an expansion of the court’s practice with a very important precedent.
It is also very important for consideration of the cases of imprisoned former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and former Defense Minister Valeriy Ivashchenko in the European court, and also Lutsenko’s own potential case in the European Court for Human Rights if the Ukrainian court fails to acquit him.
At the moment, Lutsenko’s defenders are preparing an appeal to the Supreme Specialized Court of Ukraine for civil and criminal cases. (The government, meanwhile, can take its appeal to the European court’s Grand Chamber within three months).
Because the lower level court and the appeals court in Ukraine committed so many violations and approved illegal decisions by finding Lutsenko guilty, we’re hoping that the appeals court will cancel these decisions, and will return his case for a repeat consideration and will immediately release Lutsenko from prison.
Courtesy
the use of Russian in official settings in Russian-speaking regions.
There are also grounds for closing the criminal case against Lutsenko because of absence of corpus delicti – or proof of a crime — in his actions. Lutsenko was arrested in December 2010 on charges of embezzlement and abuse of office for allegedly giving illegal bonuses and perks to his driver. Lutsenko was sentenced to four years in prison in February.
However, my respect for the Ukrainians justice is not great enough to realistically hope the courts will reverse the conviction and set him free.
If the appeals court upholds the decisions of lower levels courts, we will of course file the next appeal to the European Court on behalf of Lutsenko for breach of right for justice and political motives for prosecution.
From now on, the Ukrainian courts, particularly those considering the cases of Lutsenko, Tymoshenko and former acting Defense Minister Valery Ivashchenko, will have to take into consideration the decision of the European Court for Human Rights in Lutsenko’s case.
For political reasons, the same judges of the Pechersk District Court and the Kyiv Appeals Court tried the cases of all of the aforementioned politicians. Their bias in deciding to jail Lutsenko has now been proved in the European Court, so the appeals court will have to take note of this and cancel their rulings.
The decision of the European Court for Human Rights in the case of Lutsenko portrays Ukraine very badly. Political prosecution is not compatible with a democratic state – particularly, when there are several other ongoing cases with political motives.
In the near future, the real test for the Ukrainian justice will be the consideration of Tymoshenko’s appeal on July 12. In case consideration of her appeal is delayed or if illegal rulings by the lower courts are not canceled, or if she still remains in detention – all of these developments will become additional evidence of the political motivation behind the persecution.
Politicians and top officials can carry criminal responsibility regardless of how high their positions were and how influential or popular they have been.
However, the arrest and jailing without a proper legal basis, a guilty verdict without any evidence of corpus delicti, the launch of new criminal cases against politicians on made-up premises are forcing us to look for the real reasons for persecution.
Considering Lutsenko’s case, the European Court conducted a very detailed analysis of validity of the investigator’s decision as well as those by the Ukrainian judges and came to a conclusion that the reasons behind the jailing of Lutsenko were political. This is just the beginning.
Viktor Yanukovych has already made history as the Ukrainian president who started political prosecution in our state. Today, there is still a chance to change the situation for the better, by allowing the court of appeals of Ukraine to speedily consider the cases of Tymoshenko and Lutsenko and produce legitimate rulings.
Also ahead is the appeals case of Ivashchenko, who for two years has been arbitrary and unlawfully detained. But there is a chance to fix the situation by releasing him from jail and giving the court a chance to acquit him.
You don’t need much for that. It’s enough to release the pressure on judges coming from Bankova Street [where the president’s office is located], and give them a signal that the cases can be tried according to the law.
Valentyna Telychenko is a prominent Ukrainian lawyer. She represented Yuriy Lutsenko in the European Court for Human Rights.
