Cfm november report 2014 eng

Crimean Field Mission on Human Rights Brief Review of the Situation in Crimea (November 2014) Analytical Review TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of contents ..................................................................................................................................... 1 І. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 3 ІI. Problems of the residents of Crimea ..................................................................................................... 5 2.1. Civil and political rights ...................................................................................................................... 5 Right to Life ........................................................................................................................................ 5 Right to Freedom and Personal Immunity ............................................................................................. 5 Disappearance ............................................................................................................................... 5 Arrests .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Freedom of Speech and Expression ...................................................................................................... 8 Freedom of Peaceful Assembly ............................................................................................................10 Freedom of Association .......................................................................................................................10 Freedom of Conscience and Religion ....................................................................................................11 Freedom of Movement ........................................................................................................................12 Right to a Fair Trial and Efficient Means of Legal Protection ..................................................................14 Court proceedings ........................................................................................................................16 Issues Related to Citizenship ...............................................................................................................18

The monitoring review prepared with support from the “Democratization and Human Rights in Ukraine” project implemented by the United Nations Development Programme and financed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark.

2.2. Social and Economic Rights ..............................................................................................................20 Property Rights...................................................................................................................................20 Freedom of Enterprise ........................................................................................................................22 Right to Health Care ...........................................................................................................................22 2.3. Position of Vulnerable Groups. Manifestations of Xenophobia ..............................................................23 Crimean Tatars ...................................................................................................................................23 Ukrainians ............................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Orphans and Children with Special Needs .............................................................................................23 III. Problems of the Residents of Crimea Forced to Excape from the Peninsula and Move to Continental Ukraine (Internally Displaced Persons) .....................................................................................................24 General situation ................................................................................................................................24 Economic Rights .................................................................................................................................25 Social guarantees ...............................................................................................................................25 Annexes ................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

2

І. INTRODUCTION The present Monitoring Review has been prepared by the Crimean Field Mission on Human Rights and is based on the materials collected by the Mission during its work in Crimea, as well as in Russia and Ukraine in November 2014.

The Crimean Field Mission (“the CFM”) commenced its work on 5 March 2014 with the support of United Nations Development Programme in Ukraine. Financial support to the Mission is also provided by the Centre for Civil Liberties (Ukraine).

The aims of the Mission are as follows: 

provision of information about the developments in Crimea;



mitigation of threats of all parties to the conflict;



maintenance of proper legal guaranties in the region, strengthening and promotion of human rights standards and effective protection mechanisms through the monitoring of the situation and verification of incoming messages about different clashes;



provision of comprehensive assistance to the initiatives aimed at the protection of human rights of all participants of the conflict.

Emphasizing that human rights remain to be a direct and legitimate concern of the international civil society while implementing the abovementioned aims, the Mission shall: 

perform monitoring of the general situation concerning compliance with the provisions of international humanitarian law and fundamental human rights in Crimea, issues of protection of human rights defenders, journalists, lawyers, as well as public figures and ensuring their professional activities;



pay special attention to the monitoring of inter-ethnic and inter-religious relations;



conduct monitoring of the activities of law enforcement agencies and state authorities;



call on all parties of the confrontation to abide by the rules of international humanitarian law and obligations in the field of the protection of human rights, as well as call on international organizations and their members and participants to control the observance of such obligations.

The Mission unconditionally refuses to resort to violence or discrimination in its activities and is guided by the principles of political neutrality and adherence to law.

The conclusions of the paper have been made on the basis of the first-hand information (observation of the situation and developments in Crimea, interviewing the representatives of key target groups), mass media monitoring, analysis of the developments and legal basis, as well as on the basis of official statistic data.

The review is prepared monthly and includes the chapters on the situation with civil and political, socio-economic rights in Crimea, as well as deals with the issues of the status of vulnerable groups and manifestations of xenophobia in the peninsula.

In addition, the Review features the issues of the residents of Crimea who had to escape from the peninsula and move to Ukraine’s mainland (internally displaced persons).

3

A quarterly analytical report on the situation with human rights in Crimea will be prepared on the basis of monthly reviews.

CFM expresses gratitude to all those who assisted in the writing of this report. The opinions, attitudes, and assessments contained in the report do not necessarily reflect those of the United Nations Development Programme, other UN Agencies or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark

4

ІI. PROBLEMS OF THE RESIDENTS OF CRIMEA 2.1. CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS RIGHT TO LIFE During the period of actual Russia’s control of the Crimean peninsula the unsolved or unduly investigated killings and enforced disappearances of Crimean Tatars and people that openly expressed their pro-Ukrainian views have been repeatedly recorded.

To date, no one is prosecuted for the murder of Reshat Ametov, who was abducted on March 3 and found dead on March 15, Stanislav Karachevsky, Major of the Ukrainian Navy, killed on April 6 in Crimea and a 16-year-old Mark Ivanyuk killed on April 20.

There is certain mistrust among the population towards the investigation into the disappearance and death of Edem Asanov, who went missing in the morning on September 29 and was found on October 6 hanged in an abandoned building in Evpatoria with a suicide note, and Belyal Bilyalov, who went missing on October 13 and was found on October 14 with signs of “poisoning with the smoking mixture”. With regard to these two cases, in addition to the official version of the Crimean government, there are leads of the violent death of these people.

The most high-profile is the Reshat Ametov’s case, who was arrested on March 3 at the central square of Simferopol in front of the Council of Ministers of Crimea by the unidentified men in camouflage uniforms. 10 days later, his body with multiple signs of force application was discovered in Zemlyanichnoe village of Belogorsky district. The cause of death was a penetrating stab wound in the eye. In early April, the Investigative Committee of the Investigation Department of the Russian Federation on the “Republic of Crimea” opened a criminal case under Part 1 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code – “homicide”.

In addition, on October 22, 2014 “the data about the criminal offense” in accordance with the provisions of Part 1 and Part 4 of Article 214 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Ukraine have been entered into the Unified Register of pre-trial investigations (according to the response the Prosecutor’s Office of Ukraine). The preliminary legal qualification according to Part 1 of Article 115 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine is “premeditated murder”.

It should be noted that despite the fact that the leadership of Crimea promised a reward for the solving of this crime, the lack of results of the investigation and the frequent changes of the investigators involved in this case, generates an opinion among the Crimean Tatars that the investigating bodies are aware of the perpertrators affiliated with the crime but their relationship with the authorities allows them to escape the responsibility.

RIGHT TO FREEDOM AND PERSONAL IMMUNITY DISAPPEARANCE The fate of citizens of Ukraine Ivan Bondarets, 24 and missing since early March, and Vladislav Vashchuk, 29, remains unknown. The last time they got in touch was from Simferopol on March 7 at about 7:30. Vashchuk called his sister and said that he, together with Bondarets, arrived in Simferopol; he complained about the check of documents and personal searches at the railway station. None of them got in touch ever since. Both activists were members of the pro-Ukrainian movements. Currently, there is no new information on their location.

5

In March a Sevastopol-native Vasiliy Chernysh, 36, disappeared. According to his relatives, before, he was a member of staff of the Security Service of Ukraine, took part in the Ukrainian movement AutoMaidan and in Sevastopol communicated in the Ukrainian language only. The contact with him has been lost since March 15. The relatives believe that he could have become a victim of the crimes committed by the “Crimean selfdefense”.

On May 22, according to the information provided by Timur Shaimardanov, initiator of the “Ukrainian People’s House” group, one of the activists of this association, Leonid Korzh, 24 went missing.

On May 26, Timur Shaimardanov himself did not come home, and none of his relatives or friends has heard from him since that time.

One of the focal points in the search for the missing activists was Seyran Zinedinov, 37. On May 30, at a meeting with the wife of Shaimardanov he said that he had reasons to believe that both activists were abducted by the “Crimean self-defense”. After that meeting, Seyran Zinedinov also did not return home.

According to Seyran Zinedinov’s relatives, they have (or they were shown) the video from the gas station surveillance camera, where the activist was last seen before the abduction. The video shows that not far from the gas station the car stopped near the activist (the plate and the brand cannot be defined due to the distance) and the man was forced into a car. After submission of an application to the police the relatives of the abducted received no information about his fate or the course of investigation.

On September 27, the cousins Islyam Dzhepparov, 17, and Dzhevdet Islyamov, 23, disappeared in the Belogorska Sary-Su district. The witnesses said that they saw two men in black uniforms searching the two young men on the road, and then pushing them into a blue Volkswagen Transporter van with tinted windows, registration plate of the vehicle 755, region 82.

Eskender Apselyamov left the house on October 3 at approximately 17:30 and was going to work. He was last seen around 18:00 buying cigarettes in a store about 400 meters away from his place of work.

The actions aimed to investigate the abductions are not perceived as effective, which in turn leads to an increase in distrust of the authorities, the disbelief in their interest in finding and bringing to justice the perpetrators.

On October 14, there was a meeting of the relatives of the missing Dzheparov, Islyamov and Zinedinov with the head of the Crimean authorities S. Aksyonov and the representatives of the Investigative Committee of Crimea. Following the negotiations, a “contact group” was established to facilitate the investigation of these disappearances.

A serious aspect in some of these episodes is the probable involvement of the so-called “Crimean selfdefense”. Given the fact that the reports of their involvement in the abductions are fairly common, and the perpetrators have not been found and brought to justice, the residents of Crimea share an opinion that the authorities are either directly involved in the crimes or are harboring the perpetrators.

The situation is exacerbated by the proposals of the Crimean authorities to release from criminal and administrative liability the “people’s militants” of Crimea, recognizing their actions as “committed in a state of emergency”, and to extend the release from liability to January 1, 2015, including for the felonies not yet committed. The relevant draft law was introduced by the State Council of Crimea to the State Duma of the Russian Federation. However, this draft law was eventually rejected by the State Duma of the RF.

6

There is information that Usein Seitnabiev, who went missing on October 21, returned home. This was announced in Facebook by the coordinator of the “contact group” Mammet Mambetov. More detailed information about this is being searched for by CFM. Photos of the majority of people abducted and missing in Crimea are attached to this report (Annex 1).

ARRESTS In November, there were cases of unjustified mass arrests and use of force among the population by the Russian “law enforcement” agencies and “people’s militants” (the so-called “Crimean self-defense”).

On November 15, around 14:00 at the “Locomotive” market in Simferopol mass arrests took place. The arrests were carried out by members of various law enforcement agencies: the Internal Affairs, the Federal Security Service, the Center of Counteraction Against Extremism (hereinafter the “E-Center”), investigators of the investigative committee, as well as other members of security services. The arrests lasted for an hour and a half. As a result, about 60 people were arrested. The causes of arrests were not articulated, they were based on “non-Slavic” appearance.

The arrested were put into three minivans and taken to the Center of Counteraction Against Extremism of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation (the “E-Center”). All the arrested underwent fingerprinting, DNA analysis, were photographed and released. Some of them received summons to the FMS on the following Monday. They were interviewed on a wide range of questions: the immigration status, membership in religious or other associations. This information was confirmed to the representatives of the CFM by market employees in addition to the detainees themselves.

On November 18, according to the “Kryminform”, at 11:00 the representatives of the “people’s militants” came to the crowd of thousands queuing to get to the State Committee on State Registration and Cadastre, and some people (about 20) were arrested allegedly for causing the “artificial agitation and the sale of places in the queue” (Annex 2).

At the same time, the police did not find the cause for the detention of citizens whom the representatives of the “people’s militants” (“Crimean self-defense”) brought from the State Committee on State Registration and Cadastre of Crimea to the Department of Internal Affairs of the Kiev district of Simferopol. This was reported by the deputy head of the press service of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Crimea Olga Bogoslovskaya.

On November 21, the CFM received information that at the central market in Simferopol the masked men performed a raid and arrested about a hundred people; the arrests were carried out based on the “nonSlavic” appearance. According to the information that was reported to the CFM by witnesses, two arrested persons were beaten.

After talking to detainees from the central market in Simferopol on November 21, the CFM has established the following.

The arrests were carried out in three stages. The first around 9:00, the second at about 10:00 and the third from 12:00 to 13:00. The arrests were carried out by people in civilian clothes accompanied by militants with machine guns wearing masks and dark brown unidentified uniforms. The people in civilian clothes introduced themselves as members of the Center of Counteraction Against Extremism of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation. They politely ivited people to the bus, without reading out the grounds for the arrest. When questioned about the arrest ground they spoke about information about the mining of 7

prosecutor’s office, and they were arresting all suspects for identification. The majority of the arrested were the customers at the market, but the sellers were arrested too. In total, according to the witnesses, at least 100 people were arrested. Out of the total arrested individuals, only about 15 were of “Slavic appearance”.

On the bus, according to the arrested, the people stopped being treated politely. Two people that demanded to be released in order to use a toilet were handcuffed and beaten.

All the arrested were taken to the Center of Counteraction Against Extremism of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation (the “E-Center”) escorted to the basement, underwent fingerprinting, saliva test and were photographed. Following this, those who had passports with them were released. The rest were offered to call the relatives or friends asking to bring the passports. The driver’s licenses were rejected for identity verification. According to witnesses, the first detainees were released about two hours after arriving to the Center. Many of the detainees, according to them, before the release were offered to sign a document that they had no claims against the law enforcement authorities.

In total, about 60 people were arrested, 10 of whom were Crimean Tatars. All the respondents noted that only the people with “non-Slavic” appearance were arrested. Different people received conflicting explanations about the causes of arrest. Mainly, they were asked questions related to the migration service.

If a person had a Russian passport, the cause of arrest was not articulated.

All the arrested were interviewed on their stay in the territory of Crimea. There were also questions about their participation in political and religious movements, such as Hizb-ut-Tahrir. They were asked whether any of their friends and relatives were involved in the military action in Syria.

On the same day all the arrested individuals were released. Some of them received summons to the Department of the Federal Migration Service of the Russian Federation in order to issue a protocol on the violation of the rules of stay in the Russian Federation. The representatives of the Field Mission visited the Migration Service together with these people aiming to find out the causes for arrest.

At the Migration Service the people were handed a protocol on the violation of Article 18.8 of the Code of Administrative Offences of the RF (violation of the rules of entry or stay in the Russian Federation). The penalty for this violation varies between 2 and 5 thousand rubles with administrative expulsion from the Russian Federation. In addition, the people were warned that once in Crimea a Center for detention of foreign nationals is established, they will be put there as offenders.

The facts of unjustified arrests by external signs constitute a violation of the right to freedom and personal immunity.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION In November, in Crimea, the CFM continued to record the facts and trends restricting the freedom of speech and expression. Some of them related to the registration of media in the peninsula and the rules of accreditation of journalists.

On November 19, the State Duma of the Russian Federation adopted in the second reading a draft law on the specifics of activity of the media in Crimea and Sevastopol. The draft law establishes that the registration of the local media, as well as the issuance of licenses for radio and television broadcasting will be performed

by April 1, 2015 for free. The document also contains a provision that “the distribution of media, including

the television and radio broadcasting in the identified areas on the basis of documents issued by the state authorities of Ukraine” shall be allowed until next April.

8

On November 25, the Presidium of the State Council of the Republic of Crimea adopted a Resolution #2221/14 governing the rules of accreditation of journalists, media representatives and news agencies in the State Council of the Republic of Crimea.

The Resolution includes the following: а) For the meetings of the State Council, extraordinary sessions of the State Council, meetings of the Presidium and events with the participation of the Chairman of the State Council, the accreditation of the Russian journalists, media representatives and foreign correspondents shall be carried out by the press service of the State Council according to the accreditation lists. The procedure for the inclusion in the accreditation lists and the reasons for the refusal to include the media representatives in the accreditation lists are not established. b) The lack of possibility to accredit for permanent work of a larger number of reporters (up to 6 people for broadcasters, 4 - for news agencies, 3 - for daily newspapers, 2 - for radio and weekly/monthly newspapers, 1 - for other types of media). c) The lack of possibility to restore the lost certificate of accreditation during the calendar year. d) The use of audio and video equipment, filming and photography must be agreed with the press service of the SC of the RC no later than one day prior to the event through submission of a separate application. e) The possibility of withdrawal of accreditation for the “biased media coverage” of the activity of the SC of the RC based on the decision of the Committee on Information Policy, Communications and Mass Media.

In addition, the CFM continues to record various forms of impeding professional activities of certain media.

On November 11, the Sevastopol Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal of the Broadcasting Center of Crimea against the decision of the Commercial Court, which on August 11 denied the claim of the Broadcasting Center and decided to remove an attachment from the property of the broadcasting company “Chernomorskaya”. However, the seized equipment of the broadcasting company has not been returned and there is no possibility to continue broadcasting.

Earlier, the CFM reported that the staff members of the Crimean Tatar creative team of the State Broadcasting Company Crimea, who were dismissed in September, appealed to court to protect their rights. Some of the claims have been reviewed by the trial court. According to the editor of the creative group Zure Pink, all claims were rejected. In the course of the proceedings the claimants petitioned for the review of the information about the balance of the State Broadcasting Company Crimea and the license of the TV and Radio Company Crimea; both claims were denied by the court. However, according to former staff members of the Crimean Tatar creative team of the State Broadcasting Company Crimea, the newly established company still has no license for broadcasting. For this reason, the closing of the old company has been postponed at least until April 2015. This means that the dismissal of the staff members due to the closing of the company has been premature.

On November 26, the newspaper Avdet, which is the official newspaper of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatars, submitted the documents to the Federal Service for Supervision in the Sphere of Telecom, Information Technologies and Mass Communications for the registration under the Russian law. The chief editor of the newspaper Shevket Kaybullaev said that without this registration the newspaper will not be able to continue its activity.

9

Also, during the preparation for the meeting with journalists of the Minister for Crimea Igor Saveliev, the representatives of accredited media were warned that photography was prohibited, and television cameramen were allowed to record only the first five minutes of the event.

FREEDOM OF PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY With regard to the “May 3rd Case”, for participation in a peaceful assembly, Crimean Tatars were arrested and more than 100 people were sentenced to fines by the court. Such severe punishment for participation in the peaceful assembly is aimed at limiting the freedom of assembly and the persecution of assembly participants.

On November 12, a Resolution of the Council of Ministers of Crimea On approval of the list of venues for public events in the Republic of Crimea was issued1.

According to this document in Simferopol the meetings can only be held in the following locations: 1. The area in front of the Crimean Republican Trade Union Palace of Culture; 2. The area in front of the “Console” Culture and Business Center; 3. Yuri Gagarin park (betneen the sculpture Three Graces in the pedestrian zone located along the ponds); 4. From the area of the Crimean Republican Trade Union Palace of Culture through the pedestrian zone located along the Kiev Street down to the Salgir river.

This Resolution will significantly limit the right of people to assemble. With the introduction of the list of places where it is allowed to hold meetings, and moreover to picket any authority, the essence of the right to freely assemble if there is a need to draw attention to a particular problem, in the place where this problem occurs, or those causing the problem or influencing its solving (the principle of “direct visibility and audibility”) is lost. The establishment of such a list of places for public events constitutes a direct restriction of the freedom of peaceful assembly.

FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION The CFM continues to record cases of restriction of the freedom of association and the pressure on public associations. Thus, the Chairman of the Board of “Chatyr-Dag” Seit-Yagya Kazakov said that in midNovember he, as the leader of the public organization, was told in the Department of Economy of Alushta about the need for termination of the lease of premises in which the repair work was carried out for the amount of nearly 200 thousand UAH. The reasons for the intention to terminate the contract could not be explained. This organization is engaged in the revival of the Crimean Tatar culture.

The member of the NGO Anti-Corruption Bureau of Crimea Ekaterina Gorelkina reported that the Department of Justice is deliberately delaying the registration of the association of citizens, which, in her opinion, is related to the anti-corruption activities of the organization and the criticizing of a number of government and regional authorities officials.

There is a continuing pressure of the Crimean government on the Foundation Crimea which is aimed to take away the premises of the organization that will also impede the work of the Mejlis of the Crimean 1

http://rk.gov.ru/rus/file/pub/pub_235446.pdf 10

Tatars. Mustafa Dzhemilev had to be excluded from the founders of the CF Foundation Crimea, as reported by the organization’s lawyer Dzhemil Temishev. The lawyer explained: “As part of the case on Mustafa’s

exclusion from the founders all the accounts and property of the organization were arrested. In order to quickly deblock the accounts, I advised not to appeal against the court decision on the exclusion of Mustafa Dzhemilev from the founders. Currently, Mustafa is excluded, and therefore we appealed against the arrest of accounts and property”.

It should be recalled that on September 15, at the request of the Prosecutor’s Office of Crimea, the Central District Court of Simferopol ruled to prohibit the CF Foundation Crimea to use its property in seven locations (including the premise where the Mejlis is located), arrest the bank accounts and prohibit to open new accounts until the exclusion of M. Dzhemilev from the founders. On November 18, the Kiev District Court of Simferopol fined the CF Foundation Crimea for 4.5 million rubles, and the Director of the organization Riza Shevkiev for 350 thousand rubles. This was caused by the repairs performed in the attic without coordination with the Committee for the Protection of Monuments. According to Dzhemil Temishev, the Foundation cannot pay such fines even if there was money on the accounts, because the accounts of the Foundation have been arrested.

FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE AND RELIGION In Crimea, the representatives of most religions of Crimea, except for the Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate, are subjected to pressure. It is expressed in various forms: intimidation, discrimination, defamation, deprivation, damage and destruction of property, establishment of alternative religious groups that contribute to the split of the population in the religious sphere, bureaucratic delays and obstacles.

Thus, a few priests of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Kyiv Patriarchate (UOC KP), together with their families were forced to leave the peninsula. According to them, many of the priests were summoned for questioning by the FSS of Russia. As of November, the churches of this diocese have been closed in Sevastopol, Krasnoperekopsk, Kerch and Perevalnoe village. According to Bishop Clement, he faced threats, the unidentified burned his country house, and he is afraid that the church in the Mramornoe village can be burned too.

With regard to the premise of the main church in Simferopol, the rent was sharply increased (from 1 UAH to 600 thousand UAH per year), and there is a risk of losing it.

A criminal investigation into the attack on the members of the church in Perevalnoe village, which was earlier reported by the CFM, was not commenced by the Prosecutor’s Office of Crimea. Such actions create a situation of impunity for the criminals.

The facts of the pressure were also reported by Bishop Eustratius (Zorya), the advisor to the Holy Synod of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kiev Patriarchate: “Many times in the cathedral church in Simferopol,

the so-called “self-defense” of Crimea picketed. After an appeal to the police, the pickets ended, but every Sunday and every holiday the leaflets were distributed. The leaflets said that “here there are supporters of the junta, the fascists, Banderovites”. He also added that the FSS agents defiantly attended the worship service and watched the parishioners.

On November 11, a Resolution of the Council of Ministers of Crimea #437 On the transfer to religious organizations of property for religious purposes being under the state ownership of the Republic of Crimea was issued. This Resolution creates conditions for the seizure of property of religious organizations that are not loyal to the current government in Crimea. There is a risk that this Resolution will primarily govern the 11

seizure of property of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Kiev Patriarchate and its transfer to the ownership of the Russian Orthodox Church (of Moscow Patriarchate), as well as the seizure of property of the Spiritual Administration of Muslims of Crimea (DUMK) and its transfer to the property of Tauride Muftiyat.

Almost all religious communities in Crimea face the problems with the extension of residence permits for members of the missions in the peninsula. For example, Peter Rosokhatsky, one of the two priests of the Simferopol Roman Catholic Parish of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, was forced to leave Crimea one day before the expiry of his residence permit, which the Russian authorities refused to extend.

On November 21, father Peter was forced to leave Crimea. The priest was unable to get a residence permit, despite the promised assistance from the prosecutor and the head of Crimea.

On November 13, the unknown tried to set fire to a mosque in the Solnechnaya Dolina village of Sudak district. This was reported by the Director of the publishing house Thesis Edie Muslimova. According to her, the attackers were not able to get inside the mosque and set fire to the window.

The prosecution for the extremist materials has become one of the tools of pressure on members of religious communities. Thus, the judge of the Bakhchsarai district court O.R. Morozko, by the decision in the case of an administrative offense of October 16, 2014 #5-719/2014 found Savry Seydametov guilty of an administrative offense under Art. 20.29 of the Code of Administrative Offences of the RF - production and distribution of extremist materials. He was sentenced to an administrative fine of 1 000 (one thousand rubles) and the confiscation of the publication “The Word about the Unity”.

This trial was attended by the program director of the “Memorial” Human Rights Center Vitaly Ponomarev, who described the process as follows: “The way it all was happening left a very vivid impression in terms of

compliance with law and validity of the charges. First of all, no one tried to find out who owns the premise in which the literature was found. There was no evidence that this literature belongs to the man, who was fined. During the trial it was revealed that of the two books mentioned in the report, one book is not prohibited. As for the other book, the list of extremist materials did not contain sufficient bibliographic data (year, place of publication, number of pages etc.). The judge said that if there is no data, but the name is the same, it shall be assumed that this is the book mentioned in the list. The judgment stated that the imam of the mosque was involved not only in the storage, but also in mass distribution of extremist literature, no matter that the fact that anyone has even read this book had not been established. The imam said in court that he was not an official. He was not constantly in the mosque; he only led the Muslims during Friday prayers. His functions are in no way related to the use of the premises in which the book was found. All these arguments were ignored by the court“.

The lawyer of Seydametov, Emil Kurbedinov filed a complaint against this decision to the Court of Appeal of Crimea, in which he requested to cancel the decision of Bakhchisarai District Court of October 16, 2014 #5719/2014 and terminate the proceedings.

On November 20, the judge of the Court of Appeal Dedeyev Y.S. decided to cancel the decision of the Bakhchisarai District Court of October 16, 2014, recognize the act of Savri Seydametov minor, release him from administrative liability, provide a verbal warning and to terminate the proceedings (Annex 3).

FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT In connection with the establishment of Russia’s control over Crimea, the freedom of movement is severely restricted, which affects not only those who are not the residents of Crimea, but also those who lived in Crimea for a long time.

12

One example is the de facto prohibition on Ismet Yuksel’s entry to Crimea, which is a gross violation of the freedom of movement. The FSS of Russia made a decision on the prohibition on entry, without specifying the justification of such a prohibition, which makes it impossible to appeal against it and, therefore, violates the right to an effective remedy (Annex 4).

For 20 years Ismet Yuksel has lived in Crimea, where he owns a house and where his family resides. In accordance with the law he earlier obtained a residence permit in Crimea, where he had been registered, including as of March 18, 2014. In Crimea, he was engaged in social and professional activities as a general coordinator of the news agency QHA Crimean News, as well as the advisor to the Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatars.

The lawyers of Ismet Yuksel clarify that the prohibition on entry to Crimea means the impossibility to reunite and live with his family, which is the interference with his privacy, leads to the violation of his labor rights, violates the right to the freedom of movement and choice of place of residence. The prohibition on Ismet Yuksel’s entry to the territory of the Russian Federation is a violation of Art. 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights (“The right to respect for private and family life”), it violates Part 1 of Art. 26 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation (“Everyone has the right to privacy”), Part 1 of Art. 38 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation (“Childhood, the family are under the protection of the state”), Part 3 of Art. 62 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation (“Foreign citizens and stateless persons shall enjoy in the Russian Federation the rights and obligations the same as citizens of the Russian Federation, except as required by federal law or international treaties of the Russian Federation”).

The establishment of the Russian border in Crimea constitutes a major obstacle in the exercise of the freedom of movement for the citizens of Ukraine residing in Crimea. The citizens of Ukraine of 25 or 45 years of age are still unable to leave the territory of Crimea. The Russian border guards deny their exit due to the fact that they don’t have a new photo in the passport of a citizen of Ukraine at the age of 25 or 45 years, which, in their opinion, leads to the invalidity of the document. However, it is impossible to put a new photo in the passport on the territory of Crimea since there are no Ukrainian migration authorities. These people are forced to either get a Russian passport, or look for other opportunities to send their passports to mainland Ukraine for putting in the new photos.

Given that all individuals that have not refused a Russian citizenship are considered by the authorities the citizens of the Russian Federation, and the Russian passport is issued to individuals that reached 14 years, respectively, at the border crossing the individuals of 14 years of age are required to show a passport. At the same time, Ukrainian passport can be obtained only upon reaching 16 years of age. In this regard, the children and their parents who do not wish to have a Russian citizenship are forced to obtain a Russian passport for children of 14 years of age in order to go to mainland Ukraine and only two years later – the Ukrainian passport.

The situation is complex for those who live in Crimea, or want to live there, but lost their passports and are currently in the mainland Ukraine. Before the establishment of the Russian border these people could restore their passports in Crimea, where they permanently reside. Now, however, in order to enter the territory of Crimea (the place of their permanent residence), they are required to show a passport to cross the Russian border. If the Ukrainian passport had been lost, these people are forced to restore the passport in the mainland Ukraine only and it takes two months (two months is the average term for restoration of the passport of a citizen of Ukraine). During this period the individuals are outside the places of their permanent residence in Crimea and are forced to seek temporary accommodation, don’t have the opportunity to see the relatives etc.

13

This problem has become most acute for the citizens of Ukraine, who were serving prison sentences in mainland Ukraine and were released from prison after March 18, 2014. Many of them lost their passports.

The loss of passports of prisoners or released individuals is a common problem in Ukraine. As a result, those released from prison receive a certificate of release. With this document they returned to their places of permanent residence for the restoration of passports. Now, however, the released individuals who had previously lived in Crimea cannot return to Crimea to their relatives or homes. The Russian border guards deny their entry to Crimea based on the certificate of release and demand to show the passport, which they do not have. Thus, the released individuals are forced to restore the passports in mainland Ukraine. Usually, it takes two months. Such individuals have no means of subsistence, no communication with relatives living in Crimea, no accommodation because their homes are in Crimea. They are forced to apply to the centers for registration of the homeless or look for other residence opportunities for a period of passport restoration.

The Border Guard Service of Ukraine has not yet provided clear information about the rules for crossing the administrative border with Crimea. The individuals crossing the Ukrainian border do not have information about the requirements as for the luggage, documents etc. This often leads to the abuse of power by Ukrainian border guards and extortion. The CFM continues to receive complaints about the illegal getting off the trains coming from the territory of the peninsula of the residents of Crimea, men aged 18 - 45 years by the Ukrainian border guards.

In addition, the CFM received complaints of the residents of Crimea whose Russian passports were seized and damaged while crossing the Ukrainian border.

RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIA L AND EFFICIENT MEANS OF LEGAL PROTECTION The Sentsov – Kolchenko Case. The Ukrainian MP Alexander Briginets sent a request to the General Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation on the status of the detained Sentsov O.G., Kolchenko A.A., Savchenko N.V., Afanasyev G.S., Chirniy A.V. The deputy received a reply, based on which he concluded that the General Prosecutor’s Office recognizes Sentsov O.G., Kolchenko A.A., Savchenko N.V., Afanasyev G.S., Chirniy A.V. as citizens of Ukraine (Annex 5). However, this reply had no impact on the case, as the Ukrainian consul was not allowed to visit Oleg Sentsov and Alexander Kolchenko and they are detained as citizens of the Russian Federation. At the same time, at the request of the Open Dialogue Foundation, the Prosecutor’s Office replied that of four prisoners only Chirniy refused the Russian citizenship and, consequently, according to the Prosecutor’s Office only he is recognized as a citizen of Ukraine.

The Ukrainian authorities are taking measures to support the Ukrainian citizens who are imprisoned in the Russian Federation. Thus, Ukraine made a decision to provide financial assistance to Oleg Sentsov’s family.

However, the human rights activists and the public were angered that such support was assigned only to Oleg Sentsov’s family and such decision was not adopted in relation to the families of the other citizens of Ukraine illegally detained in the Russian Federation.

On November 26, in Ukraine there were campaigns aimed to support Alexander Kolchenko and other political prisoners, the citizens of Ukraine that are in the territory of the Russian Federation. That same day, Alexander Kolchenko turned 25.

The “May 3rd Case”. On November 25, under the May 3rd Case, which the CFM earlier described in more detail, another Crimean Tatar Edem Ebulisov was arrested. He is the fourth detainee in this case. Prior to this, Musa Apkerimov was arrested on October 16, Rustam Abdurakhmanov on October 17, and Tahir Smedlyaevon October 22. All of them are currently under arrest.

14

According to the lawyer, the detainee will be charged for the use of violence against a police officer. The investigation claims that Edem beat police officers with a flagpole.

According to relatives, the only available information is that Edem Ebulisov is suspected of committing a crime under Part 1 of Art. 318, and he admits his guilt. Despite this and the fact that the suspect is the father of three children, the Kiev District Court on November 26 imposed a restraint – detention.

The previously arrested Tahir Smedlyaev remained detained according to the decision of the Court of Appeal of Crimea of November 14. One of the causes for the arrest of Tahir Smedlyaev was articulated by the prosecutor as his relation with a radical group “Pravyi Sector” that exists in Ukraine. The lawyer of Tahir Smedlyaev Emil Kurbedinov had to send a request to the “Pravyi Sector”, for which he received a response that Tahir Smedlyaev is “unfortunately not” a member of their party (Annex 6).

The CFM recorded that in the trial on Tahir Smedlyaev’s case numerous violations were detected. All these facts indicate the serious restrictions on the right to a fair trial, as well as violations of the right to efficient means of legal protection.

In the course of survey of more than 100 May 3rd protesters, the CFM has not found evidence of the use of violence against the police, the violation of the order or manifestations of extremism during the protests.

However, there were serious violations of the freedom of assembly. The investigation officers did not provide the evidence that the arrested are dangerous to the society and that their detention is necessary. The searches and arrests in connection with this case include the elements of pressure and intimidation.

It should be recalled that on 3 May, 1,500 to 3,500 people (according to various data) went to the administrative border of Crimea to meet the national leader of the Crimean Tatars Mustafa Dzhemilev. At the border they met the unidentified men in the unmarked military uniform, the police and armed special forces, which started shooting in the air, when people tried to approach Dzhemilev. These people spent a few hours surrounded by the military. Concurrently, in a number of settlements of Crimea the federal highways were blocked. Mustafa Dzhemilev asked the citizens to disperse in order to avoid casualties, and went back from the border; after that the people were allowed to go back to the territory of the Crimean peninsula.

As a result, against the participants from Krasnogvardeisk, Bakhchisarai, Dzhankoy, Belogorsk, Soviet and other districts more than one hundred and ten administrative cases were opened under the various articles of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation. The imposed fines range from 10,000 to 50,000 rubles.

Within the framework of the criminal case, the law enforcement officials conducted a series of searches and interviews with members of the Mejlis and their relatives. The search took place in the house of Mustafa Dzhemilev in Bakhchisarai, as well as in the houses of representatives of the Mejlis from different districts Isa Nurlaev, Eskender Bariev, Mustafa Asaba and several others.

The lawsuits against the Foundation Crimea. On November 18, the Kiev District Court of Simferopol ruled to impose a fine on the head of the Charity Foundation Crimea Risa Shevkiev in the amount of 350 thousand rubles for the violation of the conservation, use and state protection of objects of cultural heritage.

According to Shevkiev, he was accused of the fact that in the premises owned by the Foundation, the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatars and the newspaper Avdet were located. The arguments of the defendant that the founder of the newspaper Avdet is the Foundation Crimea were not taken into account by the court.

On November 18, the Kiev District Court of Simferopol ruled to impose a fine on the Charitable Foundation Crimea in the amount of 4.5 million rubles. According to the lawyer Dzhamil Temishev, the judge was 15

challenged since before that he had already reviewed the case on bringing to administrative responsibility the head of the Foundation Crimea and would not be able to remain objective in the consideration of the following case. However, the challenge was ignored. According to Dzhemil Temishev, the Foundation cannot pay such fines, even if there was money on the accounts, because the accounts of the Foundation have been arrested.

Moreover, the State Committee for Protection of Cultural Heritage of the Republic of Crimea appealed to the Economic Court of Crimea with the claim to withdraw from the CF Foundation Crimea the premises located at 2, Schmidt St. (the building where the Mejlis was located) with their further public sale, as reported by the lawyer of the Foundation Dzhemil Temishev.

The sanctions imposed against the Foundation are biased and do not correspond to the level of social danger of the administrative violations charged against the Foundation. This allows to conclude that the trial and the decisions made are not objective and constitute a politically motivated prosecution. These decisions are aimed to impede the activities of both the Foundation Crimea and the Mejlis of Crimean Tatars.

COURT PROCEEDINGS One of the main issues of court proceedings in Crimea is the status of individuals who make decisions in the courts. They are individuals serving as judges. They include the judges, who previously worked in the courts of Ukraine. The majority of Ukrainian judges who worked in Crimea did not resign as the judges of Ukraine and were not approved as judges of the Russian Federation. Many judges did not undergo the qualification of the Supreme Judicial Qualifications Board, which means that they have no right to render judgment.

However, the judges continue to adopt decisions in the courts of Crimea.

Currently, the judges adopt decisions in the name of the Russian Federation even in the cases on the violation of the legislation of Ukraine for the period by March 2014.

Thus, there is a problem with the legitimacy of judicial decisions adopted in Crimea. On the one hand, according to Ukrainian legislation, such decisions are null and void, and on the other hand, according to the provisions of Russian legislation, the individuals that currently make judgments, do not have the status of judges of the Russian Federation.

The judges of Crimea make judgments based on par. 5 of Article 9 of the Law #6-FCL On the admission of the Republic of Crimea into the Russian Federation. According to this provision “prior to establishment on the

territory of the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol of federal courts of the Russian Federation, the justice on behalf of the Russian Federation in these areas shall be executed by the courts acting as of the date of admission of the Republic of Crimea into the Russian Federation and formation of new subjects of the Russian Federation. The individuals holding positions of judges of these courts shall continue to execute justice prior to the establishment and commence of activity of the courts of the Russian Federation in these areas, provided that they have the citizenship of the Russian Federation”.

Hence, the court decisions in the name of the Russian Federation in Crimea are still made by former Ukrainian courts. However, in such a short period of time they are not able to master the Russian legislation and undergo the appropriate procedures for the appointment as judges.

Thus, the competence of these judges raises doubts leading to an ambiguous interpretation and application of the legislation, “dilution” of law and as a result - the violation of the right to a fair trial.

16

According to par. 2 of Art. 9 of the Federal Constitutional Law of the Russian Federation On the admission of the Republic of Crimea into the Russian Federation and formation of new subjects of the Russian Federation – the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol city of federal significance approved by the State Duma on March 20, 2014 and approved by the Federation Council on March 21, 2014, the priority right to be appointed as the judge in the courts of the Russian Federation, which are established in Crimea and Sevastopol, shall rest with the judges that worked in the Crimean and Sevastopol courts at the time of admission of the republic into the Russian Federation. This rule applies to those who received Russian citizenship and comply with other requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation for candidates for judgeships. The competitive selection for the position of judge in the courts of Crimea and Sevastopol shall be performed by the Supreme Judicial Qualifications Board of the Russian Federation.

However, the former Crimean judges have just started to undergo such competitive selection for the position of judge in the future federal courts of Crimea.

For a long time in Crimea there was information about the so-called “rotational basis” for judges who were sent to Crimea from Krasnodar. However, the careful examination of the issue by the CFM has not revealed a confirmation to the above information.

The monitoring group of the CFM has monitored the access to justice in the Crimean courts. The monitoring visits were carried out in the following courts: Simferopol District Court, the Court of Appeal of the Republic of Crimea, the Central District Court of Simferopol, the Economic Court (Court of Arbitration), the court of Evpatoria, the Nizhnegorsk District Court, the court of Lenino settlement, the Zheleznodorozhny District Court of Simferopol, the Leninsky District Court of Sevastopol.

At the entrance to the courts there are police officers (1 to 4 staff members) and bailiffs (1 to 3 bailiffs) watching; in some courts the guarding at the entrance was carried out by individuals in civilian clothes (Economic Court). In most courts it is obligatory to pass through the metal detector and check of personal belongings. The bailiffs or police officers require to show the identification document and explain the purpose of visiting the courthouse.

At the Economic (Arbitration) court in order to enter the building it is necessary to get permission from the judge over the phone, or to show a court decision. This requirement is applied based on the Regulation on the admission and access regime in the Economic Court of the Federal Republic of Crimea by the staff of the public institution the Extra departmental Protection Directorate.

The monitoring group was provided with this provision for the review (Annex 7). The provision does not limit the access to the open court hearings, does not restrict the entry for court staff and those involved in the proceedings, but restricts the access to the courthouse if an individual does not know the name of the judge and the particular case and is not a staff member of the court/the person involved in the proceedings.

In the Leninsky District Court of Sevastopol the bailiffs at the entrance demand to name the room and surname of the judge that reviews the case.

In the Zheleznodorozhny District Court the member of the monitoring group was denied access to the courthouse. The reason for the denied access was announced by bailiffs as the insufficiency of the purpose of the visit. The member of the monitoring group said that the purpose of his visit was “to familiarize with the procedural documents on the information boards”.

In the courthouses there are information boards, which contain the following information:

17

1) the bank details for payment of the state duty; 2) the extract from the Tax Code of the Russian Federation on the amount of the state duty; 3) the visiting hours of the court administration on the non-procedural issues (not available in all the courts); 4) a list of cases for consideration by the judges (often these lists are not complete).

Most courts that have been visited by the monitors lack the examples of procedural documents.

The lists of judges are attached (Annex 8).

Thus, there are different ways of preventing the access to the courthouses and the lack of the necessary legal information in the courthouses, which restricts the right to a fair trial and efficient means of legal protection.

ISSUES RELATED TO CI TIZENSHIP The issues related to citizenship remain the most acute for every resident of Crimea.

Almost every resident of Crimea should apply to the territorial bodies of the Federal Migration Service to perform the following: -

issuance of documents of a foreign citizen for stay in Crimea for those wishing to retain the Ukrainian citizenship;

-

registration of the Russian citizenship and obtaining a Russian passport;

-

registration at the place of residence or stay.

In November the Crimean Field Mission recorded huge queues (of several hundred people; the maximum recorded number was 1400) at the premises of the Federal Migration Service in Simferopol; in the districts of Crimea the queues counted up to a hundred people. The acceptance rate is very low, thus, enrolling in a waiting list, for example, for the migration registration, the people shall be able to see the staff member of the migration service not earlier than in 3-4 months.

Currently, the formation of waiting lists is the responsibility of people (except for the situation in Sevastopol) willing to get an appointment at the migration service, which often creates problematic situations where the previously registered people do not find themselves in the lists or the lists disappear; it is necessary to check the lists nearly every day. This creates a serious tension.

The Crimean Field Mission has recorded that the greatest difficulties arise among the people willing to retain the Ukrainian citizenship, and obtaining a residence or a temporary residence permit for stay in Crimea.

Firstly, the waiting lists for migration registration are very long and practically do not progress. The time of reception and the speed of solving the issue are quite low due to the huge package of documents, which needs to be prepared by an individual, and this leads to the fact that the individual does not have the time to obtain the documents allowing to legally stay in Crimea according to the requirements of authorities of the Russian Federation. Moreover, there are cases when such delays resulted in holding the applicants liable for exceeding the term of permitted stay.

18

Secondly, there are cases when the citizens of Ukraine that permanently resided in Crimea but did not submit a declaration of refual of Russian citizenship (by mid-April), in the course of applying for a residence permit, are denied on the grounds that they are “automatically considered as citizens of the Russian Federation�.

In addition, it should be noted that on November 14, the Russian government set a quota for the issuance in 2015 of 126,055 permits for temporary residence in the Russian Federation for foreign citizens and stateless persons. Of this number, only 1,900 permits shall be issued for Crimea and Sevastopol (for Crimea - 1500 and for Sevastopol - 400). This is the least number compared to other federal districts of the RF. This is indicated in the Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 14, 2014 #2275-r.

Such a low number of quotas does not correspond to the number of people who lived in Crimea and are willing to retain the Ukrainian citizenship and obtain a temporary residence or residence permit for stay in Crimea.

The issue related to proving the fact of residence in Crimea during March 2014 requires special attention.

The Crimeans who do not have the Crimean registration and permanently reside in Crimea, at the time of submission of documents to the FMS are not recognized as citizens of the Russian Federation and are forced to prove the fact of residence in Crimea in court. The FMS does not give them a notice of refusal to issue a passport, which is required by the judiciary. This is a violation of the right to efficient means of legal protection. In November, there were also cases of court refusal to recognize the fact of residence in Crimea

by March 18 of people who over the years have resided and continue to reside in Crimea. Such judgments create huge problems for people and indicate the incompetence of judges.

The people willing to obtain the Russian passports and citizenship also face a number of difficulties.

Firstly, there are cases when in the Russian passports there is no stamp on the registration of residence, forcing the individuals to enroll in the waiting lists for registration (for up to several months). The lack of registration complicates employment; such individuals are denied the registration as business entities, the obtaining of social benefits, the military registration.

Secondly, there are errors in the newly issued documents, which do not allow to use them. In some departments of the Migration Service there were considerably long waiting lists for the correction of errors, and in some departments it was impossible to correct the errors because the waiting lists were not formed due to the absence of employees in charge of this work.

Special attention is required for the situation with foreign nationals (non-citizens of Ukraine), staying in the territory of Crimea as of March 2014 (in some cases - for several years) and currently willing to obtain the Russian citizenship. Since the simplified procedure applies only to the citizens of Ukraine or stateless persons, these individuals are more discriminated. This issue is particularly sensitive in the cases of returning from the places of deportation of the Crimean Tatars, who as of March 2014, being the citizens of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and other countries, are seeking to legalize their status in Crimea.

There are cases of failure of FMS to recognize as Russian citizens the children born in Sevastopol on March 16 - 18. According to the parents of 35 children born during these two days, the Department of the Federal Migration Service in Sevastopol suggested them to obtain the migration cards for children. The parents were also suggested to apply to court in order to justify the stay of these children in Crimea as of March 16.

The Crimean Field Mission also noted that in general, the greatest difficulty with regard to matters of citizenship derives from the lack of necessary and sufficient information for the public about the process of obtaining, retention of citizenship, as well as the consequences of certain actions. The people hardly have an opportunity to receive consultation (in the departments of FMS there are no phones to communicate with 19

people; in the departments of FMS in major cities of Crimea there are no available information boards; at the FMS premises there are representatives of the self-defense “people’s militants” not allowing the people into the premises and constraining the queues). However, the CFM believes that the issue of adequate provision of information to people about the procedures relating to citizenship can be promptly resolved.

2.2. SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC RIGHTS PROPERTY RIGHTS The Crimean authorities continue the nationalization of the state property of Ukraine. Thus, without the consent of Ukraine, according to the decision of S. Aksenov the part of the railway, infrastructure and defense facilities, healthcare and educational establishments, tourism objects, objects of mining and processing industry of Chernomorneftegas, Ukrtransgas, the Feodosia Oil Product Supply Enterprise and other were transferred to the Crimean authorities.

In addition to the Ukrainian state-owned facilities, the lists of objects that are subject to nationalization include a significant number of private property, especially the commercial property.

Thus, the seizure of property that belongs to the major Ukrainian businessman Igor Kolomoisky continues.

Earlier, the premises and property of Privatbank, Foros sanatorium and gas stations have been seized. In November, the bailiffs transferred the withdrawn archive of Privatbank to the Fund for the Protection of Depositors.

The policy of nationalization of commercial objects continues to be accompanied by the seizure of property involving the armed groups of the so-called “Crimean self-defense”.

Thus, on November 12, their representatives attempted to seize the enterprise Krymhleb, which was “nationalized”2 based on the decision of the State Council of Crimea by way of seizure of the given property.

The representatives of the “Crimean self-defense” occupied the Simferopol Bread Products Plant, which is interconnected with Krymhleb. The law enforcement agencies have not applied any action against the representatives of the paramilitary forces that seized the property. The Financial Supervision Agency of Crimea justifies such action by the fact that, according to representatives of the Service, the enterprise violated the law and there was “a loss of financial resources due to inefficient management decisions" amounting to 285.2 million rubles. Moreover, the Anti-Corruption Committee at the Council of Ministers of Crimea is trying to justify the seizure of the enterprise by the fact that Krymhleb, in its opinion, may have been involved “in the financing of the military operation carried out by Kiev authorities in the South-East of Ukraine”. However, the evidence of the above has not been presented. Previously, Krymhleb was a public joint stock company and one of the main producers of bakery products in Crimea.

According to the decision of the Crimean authorities the list of property objects also includes certain property of people’s deputies of Ukraine. Thus, on November 19, in the morning the representatives of the “Crimean self-defense” entered the building where the reception of the people’s deputy of Ukraine Andrey Senchenko is located (in Simferopol, 11, Pushkin Str.). The unidentified individuals in camouflage uniforms used the angle grinder to remove the locks from the doors of the building. In addition to the deputy’s reception, in the building there are also the offices of several companies. The police officers that were at the site did not interfere with the actions of the “Crimean self-defense”. The unlawful entry into the building and damage to property by the representatives of the “Crimean self-defense” were explained by the decision of 2

http://rk.gov.ru/rus/file/pub/pub_235948.pdf 20

the Council of Ministers of Crimea on the nationalization of the building located at 11-a, Pushkin Str. The object that had been occupied is located at 11, Pushkin Str. The “Crimean self-defense” has been involved for the breach of contractual obligations in relation to the property. Thus, the Ukrainian company Transbud earlier concluded a sales contract with the Crimean company Crimean Passage amounting to 5 million USD. The founder of the Crimean Passage is the sister of the Simferopol city council deputy Sergei Lapenko. Transbud fulfilled its obligations and transferred 57 units of construction machinery to the Crimean Passage, but the latter did not pay the cost of the equipment, which was its obligation. Transbud currently is unable to return the equipment, as the parking with this machinery was occupied by the representatives of the “Crimean self-defense”. According to Transbud representative Violeta Sineglazova, the police believe that the actions of paramilitary forces do not constitute a crime, and the judicial authorities deliberately delay the process of making a decision on the interim measures.

The mass violations of property rights by the “Crimean self-defense” are recognized by different parties.

Thus, the First Secretary of the Crimean republican branch of the Communist Party the Communists of Russia Leonid Grach appealed to the General Prosecutor of the Russian Federation with a request to conduct a thorough review of the facts of violations of property rights of the Crimeans and assess the “actions of selfdefense and similar forces”. In his appeal, L. Grach referred to the occupation by the “Crimean self-defense” of the poultry plant named after Frunze in Saki district and the children’s health camp Luchisty in the Zaozernoe settlement.

On November 12, the State Council of Crimea adopted a decision to “nationalize”3 the health complex Aivazovsky, which belongs to the major Ukrainian businessman Sergei Taruta. The CFM found out that the Crimean authorities are considering the nationalization of a residential facility, which is owned by SKM Company of another major Ukrainian businessman Rinat Akhmetov.

The residents of the Crimea, which had previously suffered from seizures of property, are trying to use legal means of protection, however, they report of their inefficiency. Thus, the farm of JSC Simferopol LLC was occupied by the “Crimean self-defense” in April. According to the director of the agricultural firm Mikhail Sirotyuk, only a month later it was possible to make the police initiate the criminal proceedings, but no specific investigative action has been taken by the law enforcement agencies.

On November 5, the Agrotrade Company (Dnepropetrovsk) appealed to the European Court of Human Rights complaining about the violation of property rights in Crimea. On June 13, 2014 a group of 10 armed men in camouflage uniforms came in two cars to the production area of AgroTrade LLC, located in the Bagerovo village of Leninsky district of Crimea, and occupied the property complex of the company with the armed guards at the facility.

The previously adopted Law of Crimea On peculiarities of redemption of the strategic objects in the Republic of Crimea continues to create conditions for the violation of property rights. In addition, the Crimean authorities decided that they could redeem the historical monuments and cultural heritage sites, which are privately owned. In this regard, on November 12, the relevant amendments were introduced to the Law On compulsory redemption of strategic objects in the territory of the Republic of Crimea. The Law, according to Vladimir Konstantinov, envisages the right to dispose of property of owners that went missing or have been absent in Crimea and did not get in touch for a long time. Moreover, the amendments to the Law entitle the authorities to forcibly redeem the objects deemed socially significant for Crimea.

3

http://rk.gov.ru/rus/file/pub/pub_235784.pdf 21

The CFM recorded complaints of the residents of Crimea against the Federal Bailiff Service (FBS). Earlier, in Crimea there was a Department of the State Enforcement Service of Ukraine. Now, however, this Service is unable to perform its duties. Between Ukraine and the Russian Federation there are no agreements on the succession, as well as no agreement between the National Bank of Ukraine and the Russian Federation.

However, the FBS began to arrest the property of the residents of Crimea, who were the debtors of the Ukrainian Privatbank. Thus, bailiffs arrested the cafe of the resident of Crimea who was in debt to the Privatbank. In addition, there were cases of arrest of private apartments based on the claims of the State Tax Inspectorate of Ukraine. The FBS has no right to carry out such actions, since it has no grounds for initiating the enforcement proceedings. The claimant applied to the authorities of Ukraine, but not to the FBS, thus the Russian bailiffs have no grounds for the arrest of property.

FREEDOM OF ENTERPRISE The CFM started to record complaints from the Crimean entrepreneurs who moved their business to mainland Ukraine. Thus, a resident of Crimea moved to mainland Ukraine in March, changed her place of registration and re-registered her business in the mainland Ukraine, was registered in the tax authorities and started paying taxes according to the new place of registration. However, the Federal Tax Service of Russian Federation ordered the confiscation of her assets in Crimea in the repayment of unpaid taxes under the laws of the Russian Federation. The relevant notification was sent to her mother as the entrepreneur lives and works at the place of residence in Ukraine.

On November 5, the Head of Crimea Aksenov signed a Decree On the Commissioner for the Protection of the Rights of Entrepreneurs in the Republic of Crimea. Svetlana Luzhetskaya was assigned as a Commissioner.

On November 21, the State Duma of the RF adopted in the third reading a package of draft laws on the establishment of a free economic zone (FEZ) in Crimea and Sevastopol, the tax and insurance rates for the participants of FEZ. The documents provide for the simplification of the visa regime, reduction of the income taxes and social contributions, and in some cases zero the customs duties, the establishment of particular taxation in Crimea and Sevastopol, the state control, entry and functioning of the free economic zone. The draft laws require the involvement of foreign nationals in employment. For the entry of foreign nationals representatives of organizations and investors and citizens coming for tourism purposes, a simplified visa procedure shall be applied. The free economic zones are created to attract investment in the region, but under the severe economic sanctions against the Russian Federation, the attraction of foreign investment in Crimea is practically impossible.

In Ukraine, in September, the Law On creation of the free economic zone Crimea and the peculiarities of economic activities in the temporarily occupied territory of Ukraine was enacted, which in the economic sphere is aimed at protecting the interests of big Ukrainian business in Crimea, but does not protect the interests of the small and medium businesses.

RIGHT TO HEALTH CARE The Council of Ministers of Crimea has developed and adopted an Action Plan (roadmap) The changes in the social sector aimed to improve the efficiency of health care in the Republic of Crimea4.

4

http://rk.gov.ru/rus/file/pub/pub_234756.pdf 22

The objectives of the Action Plan (roadmap) are to improve the quality of medical care by improving the efficiency of health care organizations and their staff, the promotion of interest of staff members in the results of their work by raising the wages.

However, currently, the situation with patients with cancer has become dangerous. The problem is that in Crime the surgeries are postponed and with cancer chemotherapy is not carried out due to the lack of medicines. The patients are forced to buy medicines at their own expense.

This information was confirmed on November 25 by the Chief of Staff of the Council of Ministers Larisa Opanasyuk at a meeting of the Crimean government. She said that it is necessary to postpone the surgeries in the Republican Clinical Hospital named after N.A. Semashko, in the ophthalmic clinic at Leningradskaya Street in Simferopol as well as in Bakhchisarai, Feodosia, Djankoi, Belogorskiy, Kirov and Nizhnegorsky districts. In addition, she said, some of the medicines needed for chemotherapy are not available in Crimea.

The postponing of surgeries and the lack of necessary medicines pose a serious risk to the life of patients.

2.3. POSITION OF VULNERABLE GROUPS. MANIFESTATIONS OF XENOPHOBIA CRIMEAN TATARS In relation to the Crimean Tatars there are systematic violations of human rights, namely the abductions, illegal searches, the lack of a fair trial in relation to the Crimean Tatars (for example – the May 3rd case), the violations of the freedom of speech, freedom of peaceful assembly and association, the discrimination on the religious grounds and other violations.

The lack of effective investigation of crimes against the Crimean Tatars, the policy of liquidation of the Mejlis bodies, the involvement of the “Crimean self-defense” in the human rights violations have created the conditions for the distrust of the authorities and law enforcement agencies among the Crimean Tatars.

The Crimean Tatars began to create associations for the protection of rights. These associations include the previously mentioned Contact Group initiated by the relatives of the abducted, and the Committee for Protection of the Rights of the Crimean Tatars. The Committee’s coordinators are a member of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatars Eskender Bariev, an activist of the national movement Sinaver Kadyrov and a member of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatars Abmedzhit Suleimanov. One of the main objectives of the Committee is to establish a register of offenses against the Crimean Tatars.

UKRAINIANS The representatives of the Ukrainian culture remain vulnerable, especially those who speak Ukrainian or openly support Ukraine. The level of xenophobia, including at the household level, in relation to Ukrainians has increased.

The Crimean authorities declared the development and protection of the three languages and cultures Russian, Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar. However, the use of the Ukrainian language is severely restricted. In Crimea the settlements that were named in Ukrainian are being renamed. The Ukrainian is mainly spoken at the household level only.

ORPHANS AND CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS

23

The main violation with regard to orphaned children in Crimea remains a violation of Art. 8 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in terms of responsibilities of the State (Russian Federation) to respect the right of the child to preserve the identity, including nationality, name and family relations. There are cases of adoption of orphans and children deprived of parental care who are citizens of Ukraine, and the subsequent removal of these children from Crimea to Russian Federation, which is a gross violation of the international norms with regard to children’s rights.

The Head of the NGO Crimean Diaspora A. Zasoba appealed to the government of Sevastopol for clarification of the situation with child support. In response to this application, on November 17, the deputy governor of Sevastopol A. Pushkarev said that the city is taking measures aimed at the implementation of the National Children’s Strategy for 2012-2017. (Annex 9).

The provisions of this Strategy create additional threats of violations of the rights of orphans and children deprived of parental care. Thus, the Strategy envisages that the host families of Russian citizens should raise up to 90% of orphans. In addition, the document suggests the reduction of the annulments of the transfer of orphans and children deprived of parental care to foster families of the citizens of the Russian Federation, as well as the reduction of the number of children placed for international adoption.

This strategic approach does not take into account the interests and wishes of children with regard to the choice of citizenship and preservation of their identity. This approach practically deprives the citizens of Ukraine to adopt the orphans remaining to stay in Crimea.

There is a concern about the situation with children with special needs in Crimea. According to the Ministry of Education, Science and Youth of the Republic of Crimea, currently there are 20 residential educational institutions, which provide accommodation and education to 2,956 children, the 365 of them being the children with disabilities and special needs. The network of boarding schools includes 7 special boarding schools for children with mental and physical disabilities where there are 801 children.

The Ukrainian authorities do not have access to these facilities for the monitoring of observance of the rights of these children. Ukraine was forced to stop the provision of funding for these institutions in April 2014, and currently there is no information about the compliance of the level of services provided with the needs of these children.

III. PROBLEMS OF THE RESIDENTS OF CRIMEA FORCED TO EXCAPE FROM THE PENINSULA AND MOVE TO CONTINENTAL UKRAINE (INTERN ALLY DISPLACED PERSONS) GENERAL SITUATION On November 19, the President of Ukraine signed the Law On the rights and freedoms of internally displaced persons, which was published on November 21. The law was developed in cooperation with human rights organizations and organizations representing the interests of the internally displaced persons from Crimea and the East of the country.

The Law fixes the single definition of the internally displaced persons under the international law: an internally displaced person is a citizen of Ukraine, who permanently resides in the territory of Ukraine and was forced to leave or voluntarily left the place of residence in order to avoid or as a result of the negative effects of an armed conflict, temporary occupation, widespread violence, massive violations of human rights and extreme natural or man-made disasters.

24

In addition, in order to determine the circumstances of forced displacement the information contained in the official reports (messages) of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the Ombudsman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine available on the websites of these organizations will be used, or in respect of such circumstances the authorized state bodies shall adopt the relevant decisions.

However, the implementation of this Law requires the introduction of changes to a number of regulations on the internally displaced persons.

ECONOMIC RIGHTS On the basis of the Law of Ukraine Law On creation of the free economic zone Crimea and the peculiarities of economic activities in the temporarily occupied territory of Ukraine, on November 3, the Resolution of the National Bank of Ukraine #699 was adopted.

The Resolution establishes a number of restrictions on the rights of persons who have a registered residence in the territory of Crimea and Sevastopol, which is a discrimination against these individuals. In addition, a number of provisions of this Resolution are not based on law and were adopted in excess of the authority.

The Resolution fixes the status of the “non-resident� for the citizens of Ukraine who have registered a place of residence in Crimea. The implementation of this Resolution led to a substantial limitation of banking services for the Crimeans, namely the replenishment of deposit accounts, the arrangement of consumer loans and mortgages, currency exchange, the use of bank accounts etc.

The Resolution requires Ukrainian banks to suspend the operations on the accounts of legal entities opened before the entry into force of the Law, which are located in the territory of the free economic zone Crimea.

As a result, the accounts of these entities were closed, and the funds are unavailable.

This Resolution violates the right to equality, as it envisages discrimination based on the place of residence.

The Resolution violates the Constitution of Ukraine and a number of Laws of Ukraine (for example, On ensuring the rights and freedoms of citizens and the legal regime in the temporarily occupied territory of Ukraine, On the freedom of movement and choice of residence in Ukraine, On the principles of prevention and combating discrimination in Ukraine).

Currently, a number of claims have been submitted to court against the National Bank of Ukraine requiring to recognize the actions of the National Bank of Ukraine on the establishment of restrictions on the exercise by individuals and legal entities located in the territory of the free economic zone Crimea of the right to conduct banking operations and exchange of currency as unlawful and discriminatory, as well as to cancel the Resolution of the National Bank of Ukraine #699 of November 3, 2014.

SOCIAL GUARANTEES There is an ongoing registration of the internally displaced persons, including from Crimea, for provision of targeted assistance to cover the living expenses, including the housing and utilities (according to the Resolution of the CMU #505 of November 1, 2014). Such persons began to receive these payments on their bank accounts.

The situation with the pensioners from Crimea willing to re-arrange the payment of pensions in the mainland Ukraine has become complex. They are required to provide the confirmation from Crimea that they do not receive pensions as citizens of the Russian Federation. However, in Crimea pensioners are denied to be 25

provided with such documents. In this regard, many pensioners from Crimea are deprived of the possibility to receive their pensions, which is usually their only source of livelihood.

Since November 17, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the Kiev City State Administration commenced a project of provision of financial support to the internally displaced persons from Crimea, Donetsk and Lugansk regions. The non-recurring targeted financial assistance is provided to families with three or more children, families with people with special needs and families with single parents.

The report was prepared by:

Vissarion Aseev, analyst of the Center of Civic Education Almenda; Victoria Gromova, representative of the Crimean Field Mission on Human Rights in Moscow; Andrey Zubarev, representative of the Crimean Field Mission on Human Rights in Kiev; Alexandra Krylenkova, expert of the Crimean Field Mission on Human Rights; Dmitry Makarov, Deputy Head of the Crimean Field Mission on Human Rights, Youth Human Rights Movement; Dariia Sviridova, lawyer, Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union; Olga Skrypnik, Deputy Head of the Crimean Field Mission on Human Rights; Tetiana Pechonchyk, Chairman of the Board of the Human Rights Information Centre.

26

ANNEXES

Annex 1

Abducted and missing in Crimea

Василий Черныш

Владислав Ващук

Иван Бондарец

Сейран Зинединов

Тимур Шаймарданов

Усеин Сеитнабиев

Джавдет Ислямов

Ислям Джаппаров

Эдем Асанов

27

Приложение 2

Участие «самообороны Крыма» (лица в черной форме) в незаконном задержании людей возле Госкомитета по госрегистрации и кадастру

28

Приложение 3

Решение Апелляционного суда по делу Саври Сейдаметова

29

Приложение 4

Ответы ФСБ и ФМС России по запрету въезда в Крым Исмету Юкселю

30

Приложение 5

Ответ Генеральной прокуратуры РФ Народному депутату Украины Александру Бригинцу на его запрос о состоянии задержанных Сенцова О.Г., Кольченко А.А., Савченко Н.В., Афанасьева Г.С., Чирния А.В.

31

Приложение 6

Ответ «Правого Сектора» о том, что Таир Смедляев не является их членом партии

32

Приложение 7

Фотокопия Положения о пропускном и внутриобъектовом режиме в хозяйственном суде Республики Крым сотрудниками Федерального государственного казенного учреждения «Управление вневедомственной охраны»

33

Приложение 8

Название суда

Судьи

Симферопольский районный суд

Захаренко Л.А. Сердюк А.С. Хиневич А.Н. Пашина П.Е. Буйнова С.Л. Тимофеева А.А. Пакула М.Р. Томашак А.С. Быховец М.А. Берберов Д.М. Дакунаева В.Ю. Куминов А.С. Неполный список судей, руководства судей: Радионов Игорь Иванович - исполняющий обязанности председателя суда Сиротюк Валерий Георгевич- заместитель председателя суда Скляров Виктор Николаевич - заместитель председателя суда Списки судей из аппеляций по гражданским делам: 1. Белоусова Викторий Васильевна 2. Дралло Игорь Григорьевич 3. Пономаренко Алла Вкиторовна 4. Синанин Александр Михайлович 5. Рошка Марина Владимировна Секретари судебных заседаний: 1. Сиделева Марина Валерьевна МИХАЙЛОВ Виталий Евгеньевич - Председатель суда ДВИРНЫК Надежда Викторовна - Заместитель председателя суда АНДРЕЕВА Ольга Николаевна БЛАГОДАТНАЯ Елена Юрьевна ГУЛЕВИЧ Юрий Григорьевич ДЕМЕНОК Сергей Валерьевич ЗАБОЛОТНАЯ Наталья Николаевна ИВАНОВ Сергей Сергеевич ИЩЕНКО Илья Викторович КУЧЕРЕНКО Наталья Владимировна ЛЕБЕДЬ Олег Дмитриевич МАЛУХИН Валерий Владимирович ФЕДОРЕНКО Эвелина Робертовна Лазарев Сергей Геннадьевич - председатель суда Чумаченко Светлана Анатольевна - заместитель председателя суда Калиниченко Антон Андреевич - заместитель председателя суда Дворний Ігор Ігорович Іщенко Ірина Анатольевна Соколова Ирина Александровна Петухова Надежда Семеновна Белоглазова Ирина Константиновна Доброрез Игорь Александрович Лагутина Наталя Михайловна Медведчук Алена Леонидовна Башилашвили Оксана Ивановна

Апелляционный суд Республики Крым

Суд Центрального района г. Симферополя

Хозяйственный суд / он же Арбитражный суд

34

Суд г. Евпатория:

Нижнегорский районный суд:

Суд Ленино: Суд Железнодорожного района Симферополя

Ленинский районный суд г. Севастополя (Ленина, 31)

Шкуро Вадим Михайлович Толпиго Валентина Ивановна Титков Сергей Якович Мокрушин Виктор Иванович Копилова Ольга Юрьевна Билоус Марина Александровна Гайворонский Владимир Иванович Ловягина Юлия Юрьевна Осоченко Инеса Константиновна Колосова Ганна Геннадьевна Гаврилюк Мария Павловна Лукачов Станислав Олегович Илличов Николай Николаевич Потопальский Сергей Степанович Гризобудова Анастасия Николаевна Куртлушаев Мурат Исмайлович 1. Захарова I.О.; 2. Ружицька Т.В.; 3. Кабаль І.Т.- дел на 13.11 не назначено; 4. Шилова О.М.; 5. Куліковська О.М.; 6. Огороднік І.В. - дел на 13.11 не назначено; 7. Воладарец Н.М.; 8. Вантритова А.И; 9. Кротова Л.В.; 10. Дудник А.С.; 11. Вельховый Игорь Николаевич - в отпуске с 5 до 17 ноября. Неполный список судей (всего 12): 1. Белякова В.Н.; 2. Брындя 3. Авакян Артур Мавсеевич; 4. Балина Татьяна Геннадьевна. Известно, что судья Шувалов не прошел переаттестацию 1. Председатель суда Масалыгина Надежда Семеновна 2. Заместитель председателя суда 3. Уржумова Наталья Валериевна 4. Афендиков Сергей Николаевич 5. Гнусарев Владимир Константинович 6. Гоцкалюк Владимир Дмитриевич 7. Домникова Мария Викторовна 8. Злотников Василий Яковлевич 9. Корогодина Оксана Эдуардовна 10. Слезко Тимур Васильевич 11. Спасенова Елена Анатольевна 12. Шильнов Николай Александрович 13. Якушева Тамара Викторовна 14. Дегтярёва Виктория Юрьевна 15. Заместитель руководителя аппарата суда 16. Гранковская Елена Васильевна 1. Рубан Максим Виторович 2. Фисюк Оксана Ивановна 3. Кукурекин Константин Васильевич 4. Истягина Надежда Михайловна 5. Гуло Анна Владимировна (Г.В. - в сокращении написано так) 35

6. Орлова С.В.

7. Непомнящий Максим Алексеевич 8. Василенко Анатолий Николаевич 9. Гаркуша Оксана 10. Климанов Виктор Николаевич 11. Казаков Валентин Вячеславович 12. Брыкало Т.В.

13. Левадко С.И.

14. Лушников Владимир Федорович

Списки судей, составленные в ходе мониторинга КПМ судов Крыма

36

Приложение 9

Ответ правительства Севастополя руководителю общественной организации «Крымская диаспора» А. Засобе по ситуации в сфере поддержки детей

37