1. On 14 March 2014, following a request of the Government of Ukraine addressed to the United Nations Secretary-General to establish a human rights mission in Ukraine, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) deployed a Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU). Since then, HRMMU has been collecting and analyzing information on the human rights situation throughout Ukraine, including in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol on the basis of United Nations General Assembly resolutions 68/262, reaffirming the territorial integrity of Ukraine and 71/205 referring to the Crimean peninsula as Ukrainian territory temporarily occupied by the Russian Federation. According to the Constitution of Ukraine, Crimea and the city of Sevastopol are separate administrative units of the Crimean peninsula having their own governing institutions.
2. The present report was developed based on the mandate of OHCHR and HRMMU, but also following a request by General Assembly resolution 71/205 on the “Situation of human rights in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (Ukraine)” for a dedicated thematic report of OHCHR on the “situation of human rights in the temporarily occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol”. The report covers the period from 22 February 2014 to 12 September 2017. HRMMU has not been provided access to Crimea by Russian Federation authorities since its former Head of Mission accompanied the former Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights, Ivan Šimonović, on 21-22 March 2014. As a result, it has been monitoring human rights developments in Crimea from mainland Ukraine.
3. Pro-Russian groups in Crimea rejected the ousting by Parliament of former President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych on 22 February 2014, criticizing it as an unconstitutional change of power. One of these groups was the ‘people’s militia’, a local paramilitary formation created on 23 February 2014, and commonly referred to as the ‘Crimean self-defence’. With the support of Russian Federation troops, the Crimean selfdefence blocked key infrastructure, airports and military installations and took control of strategic facilities. It has been accused of committing numerous human rights abuses with impunity since the end of February 2014.
4. The President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin stated that in a meeting with heads of security agencies during the night of 22 and 23 February 2014 he took the decision to “start working on the return of Crimea to the Russian Federation”.
5. On 27 February 2014, uniformed men without insignia took control of the Parliament of Crimea. On the same day, the Parliament of Crimea dismissed the Government of Crimea. On 11 March 2014, the Parliaments of Crimea and Sevastopol adopted a joint Declaration of Independence stating that Crimea and Sevastopol will unite to form an independent state - the ”Republic of Crimea” - and seek integration into the Russian Federation if Crimean residents choose to join the Russian Federation at a referendum scheduled for 16 March. According to the pro-Russian authorities in Crimea, a large majority of voters backed Crimea’s “incorporation” into the Russian Federation. The referendum was declared invalid by the Government of Ukraine and the United Nations General Assembly. The United Nations Secretary-General Ban-Ki Moon expressed “deep concern and disappointment”, adding that the referendum would only exacerbate an “already complex and tense situation”. Subsequently, the Russian Federation and the “Republic of Crimea” signed on 18 March 2014 a “treaty of accession” effectively annexing the peninsula into the Russian Federation.
6. One consequence of this development was the imposition of Russian Federation citizenship on residents of Crimea. This has resulted in regressive effects on the enjoyment of human rights, particularly for those who refused to automatically adopt Russian Federation citizenship, were ineligible to obtain it, or were required to forfeit their Ukrainian citizenship in order to remain employed.
7. Since the beginning of occupation, Ukrainian laws were substituted by Russian Federation laws, in violation of the obligation under international humanitarian law to respect the existing law of the occupied territory. Among other implications, this led to the arbitrary implementation of Russian Federation criminal law provisions designed to fight terrorism, extremism and separatism, which have restricted the right to liberty and security of the person and the space for the enjoyment of fundamental freedoms.
8. Laws and judicial decisions deriving from the implementation of the legal framework of the Russian Federation in Crimea have further undermined the exercise of fundamental freedoms. Mandatory re-registration requirements were imposed on NGOs, media outlets and religious communities in Crimea. Russian Federation authorities have denied a number of them the right to re-register, generally on procedural grounds, raising concerns about the use of legal norms and procedures to silence dissent or criticism.
9. Most affected by these restrictions were individuals opposed to the March 2014 referendum or criticizing Russian Federation control of Crimea, such as journalists, bloggers, supporters of the Mejlis, pro-Ukrainian and Maidan activists, as well as persons with no declared political affiliation but advocating strict compliance with the tenets of Islam, who are often accused of belonging to extremist groups banned in the Russian Federation, such as Hizb ut-Tahrir. The rights of these people to freedom of opinion and expression, association, peaceful assembly, movement, thought, conscience and religion, were obstructed through acts of intimidation, pressure, physical attacks, warnings as well as harassment through judicial measures, including prohibitions, house searches, detentions and sanctions.
10. Russian Federation justice system applied in Crimea often failed to uphold fair trial rights and due process guarantees. Court decisions have confirmed actions, decisions and requests of investigating or prosecuting bodies, seemingly without proper judicial oversight. Courts frequently ignored credible claims of human rights violations occurring in detention. Judges have applied Russian Federation criminal law provisions to a wide variety of peaceful assemblies, speech and activities, and in some cases retroactively to events that preceded the temporary occupation of Crimea or occurred outside of the peninsula in mainland Ukraine.
11. Grave human rights violations, such as arbitrary arrests and detentions, enforced disappearances, ill-treatment and torture, and at least one extra-judicial execution were documented. For a three-week period following the overthrow of Ukrainian authorities in Crimea, human rights abuses occurring on the peninsula were attributed to members of the Crimean self-defence and various Cossack groups. Following Crimea’s temporary occupation, on 18 March 2014, representatives of the Crimean Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation (FSB) and police were more frequently mentioned as perpetrators.
12. While those human rights violations and abuses have affected Crimean residents of diverse ethnic backgrounds, Crimean Tatars were particularly targeted especially those with links to the Mejlis, which boycotted the March 2014 referendum and initiated public protests in favour of Crimea remaining a part of Ukraine. Intrusive law enforcement raids of private properties have also disproportionately affected the Crimean Tatars and interfered with their right to privacy under the justification of fighting extremism. Furthermore, the ban of the Mejlis, imposed in April 2016 by the Supreme Court of Crimea, has infringed on the civil, political and cultural rights of Crimean Tatars.
13. The Russian Federation authorities in Crimea have failed to effectively investigate most allegations of human rights violations committed by the security forces or armed groups acting under the direction or control of the State. Failure to prosecute these acts and ensure accountability has denied victims proper remedy and strengthened impunity, potentially encouraging the continued perpetration of human rights violations.
14. Since the beginning of the temporary occupation, all penitentiary institutions in Crimea have been integrated into the penitentiary system of the Russian Federation, leading to numerous transfers of detainees from Crimea to penal colonies in the Russian Federation, contrary to provisions of international humanitarian law.
15. Restrictions affecting freedom of movement to and from Crimea have been imposed by the Russian Federation and Ukraine on the grounds of security or pursuant to immigration rules. They include five-year exiles, deportations, prohibitions on entry of individuals and public transportation, non-recognition of documents, and restrictive regulations applicable to travel of children and transportation of personal belongings.
16. Large scale expropriation of public and private property has been conducted without compensation or regard for international humanitarian law provisions protecting property from seizures or destruction. Crimean Tatars who returned from deportation in the 1990s and built their houses on land plots without obtaining construction permits remain at risk of seeing their security of tenure contested and being forcibly evicted.
17. The space for public manifestation of Ukrainian culture and identity has shrunk significantly. Groups manifesting their attachment to national symbols, dates or historic figures have been issued warnings or sanctioned by courts for violating public order or conducting unauthorized rallies. Education in the Ukrainian language has almost disappeared from Crimea, jeopardizing one of the pillars of an individual’s identity and cultural affiliation.
18. The availability of health services in free-of-charge State medical institutions has been impaired since March 2014 due to the numerous departures of doctors and other medical staff to more lucrative private sector institutions in Crimea. This has resulted in delayed treatment of the most economically disadvantaged, jeopardizing their right to life and health. Retrogressive measures stemming from the implementation of Russian Federation legislation have affected people suffering from drug dependence.
19. The right of the Crimean population to an adequate standard of living has been affected by measures taken by Ukrainian authorities or implemented on mainland Ukraine, including the interruption of water and energy supplies to the peninsula. Under international humanitarian law, the Russian Federation as the occupying power is obliged to ensure to the fullest extent of the means available to it sufficient hygiene and public health standards, as well as the provision of food and medical care to the population. At the same time, this does not exonerate Ukraine from its obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights not to interfere with the enjoyment of the rights it enshrines, and from respecting the requirement under international humanitarian law to ensure that the basic needs of the population continue to be met under conditions of occupation.
Full Report you can download HERE
