This date will remain etched in the history of the European continent. On Wednesday March 16, at 1.37 p.m. exactly, the Russian flag was lowered from its mast on the forecourt of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg (Bas-Rhin). On the same day, the institution, guarantor of the rule of law on the continent, officially excluded Russia because of its invasion of Ukraine three weeks earlier. Immediate consequence: its judicial arm, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), has announced that it will suspend the examination of requests concerning Moscow.
>> War in Ukraine: find the latest information in our live
This historic divorce puts an end to twenty-six years of partnership. To anticipate the snub, Russia had announced the previous Friday that it intended to slam the door of the organization anyway. “Due to the Russophobic activity of Westerners, this structure is losing its raison d’être”, had justified in a press release the spokesperson for Russian diplomacy, Maria Zakharova. And to add about this expulsion: “It does not change anything fundamentally for us. It only exempts us from respecting the procedures and residual obligations imposed on us.”
This exit now raises fears of a deterioration in the human rights situation in Russia, already regularly pointed out by international organizations. The 145 million Russians will in fact no longer be able to benefit from the protection of the ECHR, which is precisely responsible for ensuring compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights by the Member States.
In an interview with the Russian independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta (in Russian), lawyer Karinna Moskalenko, who represents many opponents of the regime before the ECHR, explains that a six-month period could be granted for new cases. It would allow Russian citizens whose rights have been violated to appeal to the Court until 15 September. A salutary reprieve in view of the tightening of Russian law, which has made any criticism of the war in Ukraine punishable by fifteen years in prison.
But the question of this delay is not settled. No more than the future of Russian litigation already in progress – “pending” cases – before the ECHR or of those which could be brought before European justice for facts prior to the exclusion of Russia by the Council. Meetings are underway on this subject.
“We are all a little blown away by this decision.”
A member of the ECHRat franceinfo
It is only the second time that the institution has been faced with such a scenario: Greece had also left the Council before being expelled from it in 1969 under the dictatorial regime of the colonels.
There remains a major problem, as the Strasbourg criminal lawyer Grégory Thuan reminds franceinfo: the presence of a judge from the country targeted by a complaint is required in certain cases. “complex” examined by the chambers of several magistrates. Judge Mikhail Lobov, recently elected to the ECHR to represent the Russian Federation, will he continue to sit there? Nothing is less sure.
Many files therefore find themselves in abeyance, like media cases such as those concerning the opponent Alexeï Navalny or Nikolay Koblyakov. This political refugee in France, president of the association Russie-Liberties, disputes his sentence to six years in prison by the Russian justice. “I will introduce the request before the ECHR and we will see what it answers”resolves his lawyer, Grégory Thuan.
Karinna Moskalenko says she is ready, in Novaya Gazetato file complaints with the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC), “a quasi-judicial body that can, to some extent, replace the ECHR for Russians”. But in the opinion of his colleague Oleksandr Ovchynnykov, lawyer at the Strasbourg bar contacted by franceinfo, “the UN mechanism is different, less efficient and less easy to access”.
Moscow was until now the main “provider” of cases before the ECHR: out of 70,000 cases pending before the Court, nearly a quarter (24.2%) concern Russian cases, according to figures communicated in January by the jurisdiction. Are the decisions of the ECHR therefore followed by effect? “Alas, the judgments of the ECHR have little effect because our judges do not respect the decisions of Strasbourg”regretted in The world Zoya Svetova, journalist and human rights activist. Since joining the Council of Europe in 1996, Russia has only fully executed 38% of the Court’s judgments against it, according to the daily.
Grégory Thuan nevertheless cites the case of this client detained in “a high security prison in Russia”for which he obtained “the alleviation of the conditions of detention”. Oleksandr Ovchynnykov mentions the financial reparations obtained by applicants and stresses that the case law of the ECHR has changed “the problem of the non-enforcement of court decisions or the length of proceedings” in Russia.
“The exit from the Council of Europe is very serious and very damaging because Russia finds itself without any real control. All the locks have fallen.”
Gregory Thuan, lawyerat franceinfo
This did not escape the regime. The former president and head of the Russian Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, sees leaving the Council of Europe as a “good opportunity” to reinstate the death penalty in Russia.
The Council of Europe also has to lose with the Russian departure. Financially first, since Russia contributes almost 7% to its annual budget. But also in legal matters. “When I make requests against France, I cite the case law against Russia because all the judgments of the court are opposable to the Member Statesexplains to franceinfo the Strasbourg lawyer Julien Martin. It is a dialogue that we will no longer have. Everyone is penalized.” This dialogue may perhaps be resumed one day, the door of the Council of Europe not being definitively closed. Greece had thus reinstated him in 1974, five years after his departure.