MENU
Documenting war crimes in Ukraine.
The Tribunal for Putin (T4P) global initiative was set up in response to the all-out war launched by Russia against Ukraine in February 2022.

Similar articles

Russia sentences three Ukrainian Jehovah’s Witnesses to six years for 'threatening state security' by discussing the Bible “Do You Still Want This War?” Anti-War Activities in Russia, 3-9 July 2022Former HR Ombudsman Lyudmyla Denisova on her dismissal, 4 years of work, Ukrainians in occupied areasAfter violently seizing Crimea, Russia accuses peaceful Crimean Tatars of ‘terrorism’ for defending political prisoners Internal fight against ‘ZEvil’ – digest of Russian protestsFamilies and lawyers prevented from attending Russia’s reprisal sentencing of Crimean Tatar journalist and civic activists Russia has already greatly surpassed the Nazi Third Reich by insidiously launching missile and bomb attacks on UkraineSurreal twist in Russia’s lawless ‘trial’ of Crimean Tatar leader Mustafa DzhemilevGuide on the investigation of torturesReform strategy of medical care for prisoners (updated)Russian prosecutor seeks 18-year sentences against Crimean Tatar journalist, human rights defender and civic activists Prominent US political analyst thanks imprisoned Crimean Tatar journalist Osman Arifmemetov for reporting on Russia's repression in occupied Crimea Russia uses horrific sentences against elderly Ingush leaders to crush peaceful protest US imposes sanctions on former Yanukovych aide Andriy Portnov for corrupting Ukraine’s courts Former US Ambassador demolishes Russia's narrative about imprisoned Crimean Tatar journalist Remzi BekirovRussia moves to dissolve Memorial NGOs that defend political prisoners and expose Russian aggression against Ukraine Effective death sentence against Crimean Tatar civic journalist reporting on repression in Russian-occupied Crimea Horrific sentences against Crimean Tatar civic journalist and three members of one family for planted ‘prohibited literature’ Six-year sentence for reading the Bible in Russian-occupied CrimeaFake ‘religious expert’ exposed in Russia’s ‘trial’ of 25 Crimean Tatar journalists and civic activists

Media Law Institute to defend its right to information in Strasbourg

04.04.2011    source: medialaw.kiev.ua

 

On 24 March 2011 Ukraine’s High Administrative Court upheld the decisions of the first and second instance courts refusing to initiate proceedings in an administrative case. This involved a suit lodged by the Media Law Institute with respect to the Constitutional Court regarding provision of information concerning a case examined by that court.

The lower instance courts found that such a case could not be examined as administrative proceedings since the claimant was appealing against the actions of the Constitutional Court carried out in connection with consideration of a court case. In its cassation claim the Media Law Institute stresses that the material it requested is already of an archival nature, yet the High Administrative Court finally established that a court appeal against the refusal to provide information is impossible.

The Media Law Institute plans to appeal against this court judgment in the European Court of Human Rights since there has been an infringement of the right to receive information guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The right of a claimant to effective remedy (Article 13) has also been violated since they were refused examination of the case on its merits.

On 17 May the Media Law Institute submitted an information request to the Constitutional Court regarding the latter’s judgment from 6 April 2010 confirming the constitutionality of the newly-created parliamentary coalition.

The Constitutional Court in its explanation referred to the opinions of leading law institutes. It was specifically copies of the opinions giving the legal possessions of academics from the Lviv Ivan Franko National University; the Yaroslav Mudry National Law Academy and the Odessa National Law Academy which the Media Law Institute asked to receive.

Incredibly, the Constitutional Court stopped access to the legal opinions from these higher educational institutions. In its response to the information request, the Constitutional Court informed that such information was the private property of the universities, and the legal positions of the academics could be circulated only with the consent of the institutes.

At the time Taras Shevchenko, Director of the Media Law Institute, stated that the position of the Constitutional Court ran counter to legislation on information and that legal analyses, on the basis of which an extremely important and highly controversial judgment was passed should be on open access. He promised then that the refusal to provide access would be appealed.  Domestic courts have now forced the Institute to turn to the European Court of Human Rights. 

 Share this