Ukraine sanctions 11 more illegitimate “judges” in Russian-occupied Crimea for persecuting residents and indigenous people

Ukraine imposed sanctions on next 11 illegitimate “judges” in the temporarily occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea on October 9, 2024, according to a recent decision by the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, enacted by presidential decree.

“Supreme Court of the Republic of Crimea”, illegally established by Russia in the temporarily occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea

The Mission of the President of Ukraine in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea proposed these sanctions as part of its ongoing efforts to monitor the situation in the temporarily occupied peninsula and implement measures against human rights violators.

The sanctioned “judges” were reportedly involved in politically motivated persecutions of Ukrainian citizens, including members of the Crimean Tatar community, who are recognised as an indigenous people of Ukraine. According to the Mission, these judges also are accused of issuing decisions in illegal trials aimed at suppressing resistance to the occupation regime.

The Mission pointed out that Russian occupying authorities have illegally imprisoned 218 people, including 132 Crimean Tatars. Additionally, 979 cases have been recorded where so-called “courts” and other occupation structures have processed cases under the charge of “discrediting the Russian Armed Forces.”

The Mission of the President of Ukraine in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea views these sanctions as a crucial tool in disrupting repressive mechanisms in the temporarily occupied territories and limiting the occupation administration’s ability to continue persecutions. 

“International support for Ukraine’s sanctions policy is critical. Only by consolidating the efforts of the global community can human rights violations be effectively countered, and those who collaborate with the occupation regime be punished,” the statement of the Mission reads. 

The Mission emphasises that strengthening sanctions pressure is an urgent necessity and that crimes against Ukrainian citizens will not go unpunished.

Previously, ZMINA Human Rights Centre published a “blacklist of officials” involved in crimes against civilians in the temporarily occupied Crimea

To provide context, human rights advocates point out that during the occupation Russia has been trying to erase the diversity of Crimea, which does not fit into its strategy of turning the peninsula into a military base. Crimean Tatars, the indigenous people of Crimea and Sunni Muslims, are a primary target of Russian political persecution and oppression.

On June 25, 2024, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) delivered a judgment on the merits in the interstate case “Ukraine v. Russia (regarding Crimea)” – the first of four interstate cases with applications against Russia in connection with its war against Ukraine. The court in Strasbourg unanimously found that Russia had massively and systematically violated human rights in temporarily occupied Crimea. This concerns 14 articles of the European Convention on Human Rights and its protocols.

The ECHR analysed a significant amount of information and evidence from many sources, which the Ukrainian government provided. This evidence describes the arrests, detentions pending trial and convictions of Ukrainians by various types of “courts” created by the Russian Federation in Crimea. The evidence also included materials from the criminal cases of the respective prisoners.

The judges note that the application of Russian law was mandatory for all “courts” throughout Crimea, and it was applied to all court proceedings and all interested parties. This was enough for the ECHR to conclude that the “courts” in Crimea are not “established by law” within the meaning of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Right to a Fair Trial) after the introduction of the so-called “Treaty of Accession” by Russia.

The ECHR found that the full-scale application of Russian law in Crimea is a violation of international humanitarian law and Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights on the impossibility of punishment without a law. After all, Russian law cannot be considered “law” for the measures taken in Crimea, within the meaning of the Convention.

Moreover, the court Strasbourg found that there was a pattern of vindictive persecution of Crimean Tatars involving the misuse of criminal law and broad-based repression against political opponents of the Russian government’s policies. This model was devised and openly advocated by prominent figures in the Russian government.

The Russian Foreign Ministry declared that the aforementioned ECHR judgment is “of no legal force” in Russia, which does not recognize it under its domestic law and will not comply with it.