Background
Fedir Anatoliyovych Vrachevskyy challenged a detention order issued by the Vasylkiv City District Court of Kyiv Region on 2 August 2024. He lodged an appeal on 7 August 2024, but it remained unexamined.
On 18 November 2024, the appellate proceedings were discontinued after the applicant’s defence counsel withdrew the appeal following a change in the preventive measure. Vrachevskyy had applied to the European Court of Human Rights on 6 November 2024, complaining that the detention-review proceedings failed to satisfy Article 5 § 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Court’s Holding
The Court unanimously held that Ukraine violated Article 5 § 4 because the applicant did not receive a sufficiently speedy review of the lawfulness of his detention. It relied on the principles established in Kharchenko v. Ukraine, where it had found a violation arising from similar deficiencies.
The Court declared the application admissible and found nothing in the Government’s submissions or the other material before it that justified a different conclusion. It awarded the applicant €500 for non-pecuniary damage and €250 for costs and expenses, plus any applicable tax and default interest if payment is late.
Key Takeaways
- Article 5 § 4 requires detention-review proceedings to determine the lawfulness of a deprivation of liberty with adequate speed.
- Although the Convention does not require a second level of jurisdiction, a state that provides an appeal must generally afford detainees the same procedural guarantees available at first instance.
- An appeal that remained unexamined until counsel withdrew it following a change in the preventive measure did not satisfy the speedy-review requirement.
Why It Matters
The judgment reinforces that providing a formal right to appeal a detention order is insufficient if the appellate court does not examine the challenge promptly. The Court’s reliance on established case law also confirms the continuing application of its findings concerning delays in Ukrainian detention-review proceedings.