Melnyk v. Ukraine — Court finds police ill-treatment of Maidan protester and inadequate investigation

Case
Case of Melnyk v. Ukraine (Application no. 25753/18)
Court
European Court of Human Rights
Date Decided
24 September 2026
Citation
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2026:0924JUD002575318
Topics
Police violence, peaceful assembly, Maidan protests, effective investigation

Background

Mark Yuriyovych Melnyk, a Ukrainian national, was among protesters affected by police public-order operations during the Euromaidan protests. On 18 February 2014, police used force against protesters, including Melnyk, who sustained minor injuries later recorded in a medical report.

Melnyk complained within the official investigations that police had ill-treated him. Those investigations remained ongoing when the Court considered the case; the Government said that not all officers who had used force against him had been identified, while several commanding officers had been charged with abuse of power and unlawful interference with the Maidan protests.

The Court’s Holding

Unanimously, the Court rejected the Government’s objection that the Article 3 complaints were premature because domestic investigations were continuing. Relying on its prior Maidan-protest case-law, it found no reason to depart from its conclusions in comparable cases.

The Court held that Melnyk had been ill-treated by police, violating the substantive limb of Article 3, and that no effective official investigation had been conducted into his complaint, violating Article 3 procedurally. It also found that the police action amounted to a disproportionate interference with his right to peaceful assembly under Article 11.

Key Takeaways

  • Police ill-treatment of Melnyk during the 18 February 2014 Maidan events violated Article 3.
  • The continuing domestic investigation was not effective enough to satisfy Article 3’s procedural obligation.
  • The force used against him disproportionately interfered with his freedom of peaceful assembly under Article 11.

Why It Matters

The judgment extends the Court’s established findings concerning police conduct and investigative failures during the Maidan protests to another individual protester. Ongoing domestic proceedings did not prevent Strasbourg review where the investigation had not met the Convention’s effectiveness requirements.

Melnyk sought no just satisfaction, so the Court made no monetary award.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top