Page 24 - Report on the infringement of rights and guarantees of attorneys in Ukraine

Yevheniia Vakulenko
attorney
On 15 February 2018, the attorney was apprehended in Kyiv by police officers near her
own house. After the attorney noted that the actions of the police were groundless, the
latter started to behave aggressively and, trying to put the attorney into cuffs, broke her
hand.

Oleksandr Horoshynskyi
attorney of the former president of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych

On 7 February 2018, the attorney arrived at the courtroom to participate in the
consideration of a petition filed by the prosecution against his client. Although he had all
the necessary powers, the attorney was removed from participating in the court hearing.
He was physically removed from the courtroom by police officers using force after
commenting on the violations of his rights and his client's rights .
37

Serhii Nesterenko
attorney

The attorney, who is involved in the case of a scandalous fight
between teenagers in Chernihiv, was beaten up on 18 April 2018 in
the city.

Some acts of violence against attorneys (for example, attacks on Valentyn
Rybin, Volodymyr Liushyk, Oleksandr Pohosian, Andrii Verba and others) may
be qualified as torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
(Article 3 of the Convention). In the case of Selmouni v. France, the ECHR
defines "torture" as any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical
or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining
information, punishment or intimidation. In the cases described above,
attorneys were attacked precisely to intimidate – the attackers attempted to
force the attorneys to stop representing certain clients in court proceedings. At
the same time, the Convention is violated not only by those who have
attacked the attorneys, but also by the authorities. Violation of Article 3 of the
Convention in the absence of proper investigation into allegations of torture is
apparent seen from the authorities’ failure to act. In the Preminin v. Russia case,
the ECHR established that Article 13, in conjunction with Article 3, imposes an
obligation on the State to carry out a thorough and effective investigation of
incidents of torture, and held that where an individual raises an arguable claim
that he has been seriously ill-treated by the police or other such agents of the
State, the State’s general duty was to carry out an effective official
investigation. Moreover, such a positive obligation cannot be regarded as
limited solely to cases of ill-treatment by agents of the State (the Denis Vasilyev
v. Russia case).

24