There has been a documented increase in the practice of enforced disappearances of a short duration. These are cases where persons are disappeared for hours, days, or a few weeks, before being released, their detention being recognised or their location and fate made known.

The spread of enforced disappearances of a short duration in recent decades, seems to mark an expansion on the practice of enforced disappearance from what could perhaps be referred to as the “classic paradigm” of enforced disappearance that dominated the 1970s through the 1990s, when victims were typically held in secret detention for years and often executed extrajudicially with their relatives never knowing their whereabouts or fate. Reports of the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances [“WGEID”], for example, have shown that enforced disappearances of a short nature have been documented across a wide geographical range, such as Bahrain, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, United States, Kenya and Venezuela. EHRAC’s own partners have documented a high number of cases of enforced disappearances of a short nature perpetrated by Russian forces in occupied areas of Ukraine with some disappearances lasting just a few hours.

Disappearances of a short-term nature have proliferated largely in times of political instability, in the context of “counter-terrorism” measures, in the follow-up to mass protests, in migration settings and as an extreme form of gender-based violence and repression. The Committee on Enforced Disappearances [“CED”] and the WGEID have noted patterns in which authorities acknowledge detaining individuals for “investigative purposes”, to “determine identity”, or to maintain “public order” during protests or States of emergency. Often, these types of disappearances are justified by States as temporary security measures. In some cases, States have denied the detentions outright; in others, they have claimed that the temporary incommunicado detention was permissible under domestic law or necessary for national security. Such justifications frequently accompany broader State narratives of combating terrorism, organised crime, or threats to public institutions. The WGEID has underscored that these trends are not isolated but reflect a systemic tactic by which States play with duration to avoid accountability. Experts have further warned that such disappearances, even when temporary, erode the rule of law and normalise the use of disappearance as a tool of governance.

Yet international standards make clear that no exceptional circumstance may be invoked to justify enforced disappearances of any duration, including national security or emergency situations. The International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearances [“ICPPED”] and the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance [“Declaration”] make the prohibition on enforced disappearances absolute and unqualified thereby prohibiting any derogation from the Convention or restriction or limitation from the obligations contained therein even in the most exceptional circumstances. While, as is outlined in this guide, enforced disappearances of a short duration unequivocally qualify as enforced disappearances, they pose distinct challenges for victims and advocates including in the course of litigation. Consequently, these cases are frequently underreported and invisible, perpetuating cycles of impunity and unacknowledged suffering for victims.

This guide lays out international human rights jurisprudence and standards relating to enforced disappearances of a short duration. It also seeks to provide practical advice for how to litigate cases of enforced disappearance of a short duration. While evidentiary, procedural and legal standards will vary among jurisdictions, the foundational legal principles outlined in the guide should be seen as applying to all States.

This guide has been written by Elba Bendo, Lawyer (International Advocacy), and Charlotta Blomqvist (Legal Officer), with guidance from Jessica Gavron (Co-Director, Head of Legal). The authors have also benefited from the invaluable input provided by partners working on cases of enforced disappearances in Ukraine and the North Caucasus regions. For more legal resources on the topic of enforced disappearances visit EHRAC’s Enforced Disappearance Legal Database.

The post Guide: Litigating cases of enforced disappearances of a short duration appeared first on European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC).

Our expert panel – Judge Mykola Gnatovskyy, Professor Marko Milanovic, Nadia Volkova and Chair Jessica Gavron – considered the extraordinary task that faced the European Court of Human Rights in this group of cases, how it dealt with the issue of jurisdiction, its approach to International Humanitarian Law (IHL), and what this judgment means for Ukraine and Ukrainians.

The Grand Chamber joined four inter-state cases, one from The Netherlands concerning the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH-17, and three from Ukraine focusing on Russian atrocities in Ukraine from its invasion of Crimea in 2014 up to and including the full-scale invasion in 2022.

English recording:

Recording with Ukrainian translation:

Our panel:

Dr Mykola Gnatovskyy has been a Judge of the European Court of Human Rights since June 2022. Before this, he was a member of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture from 2009 to 2021, serving as its President for three terms (2015-2021).

For over two decades, Dr Gnatovskyy has taught international humanitarian law, international criminal law, and human rights law at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. He holds an LL.M. and Ph.D. in International Law and is the 1st Vice-President of the Ukrainian Association of International Law.

‘The Grand Chamber’s judgment in Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia establishes the first legally authoritative human rights chronicle of the ongoing war.’

Judge Gnatovskyy

Marko Milanovic is Professor of Public International Law at the University of Reading School of Law and Director of the Global Law at Reading (GLAR) research group, as well as the Raoul Wallenberg Visiting Chair of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, University of Lund. Professor Milanovic is the Special Adviser on Cyber-Enabled Crimes to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court. He is also co-editor of EJIL: Talk!, the blog of the European Journal of International Law, as well as a member of the EJIL’s Executive Board. He is an Academic Expert at Doughty Street Chambers.

This was an extraordinary judgment, demonstrating that human rights law can effectively be applied in armed conflict. But the Court also left many important issues open, which will be litigated and hotly disputed in the future.’

Professor Marko Milanovic

Nadia Volkova is a lawyer practicing in Ukraine and specialising in international humanitarian and international criminal law. She was educated and has extensive legal and advocacy work experience in the UK (having been called to the Bar of England and Wales in 2009), France and the US. She returned to Ukraine just before the Revolution of Dignity, which was followed by the illegal annexation of Crimea and the break-out of the armed hostilities in eastern Ukraine. In 2015, she started working in one of Ukraine’s largest NGO’s on cases of grave human rights violations in eastern Ukraine. In 2018, she founded the Ukrainian Legal Advisory Group (ULAG).

ULAG’s work has had a narrower focus on monitoring, analysing and continuously assessing the legal landscape in Ukraine through the prism of the international standards of due process. ULAG’s lawyers litigate strategic cases at the national and international courts and tribunals. They also advocate for the legislative and institutional changes in order to ensure accountability for grave crimes committed in the territory of Ukraine since 2014. ULAG is a member of Ukraine 5am Coalition.

In 2022, Nadia was a recipient of the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE) Human Rights Award for her outstanding commitment in to human rights and the rule of law in Ukraine and internationally.

‘This was a judgement a lot of Ukrainians had been looking forward to because they had been promised justice for all the pain and suffering caused by the Russian state. While Russia’s expulsion from the Council of Europe was a politically correct step, it has led to a reality where for the individual applicants to be able to claim compensation will be incrementally difficult. We need to think of a solution for enforcing individual judgments that will follow the

Nadia Volkova

Event Chair: Jessica Gavron is Co-Director and Head of Legal at the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC)

The post Webinar: Ukraine and The Netherlands v. Russia, the European Court of Human Rights Judgment appeared first on European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC).

This annex is available to download in English and Ukrainian.

Trauma is an emotional response to an event which is so distressing, negative or intense that it overwhelms our capacity to cope.

Trauma in the context of conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) may take the form of single-incidence trauma, such as a sexual assault, or complex trauma which includes chronic or repetitive experiences of trauma such as forced marriage or ongoing sexual violence while in detention. It can involve both these elements with incidences of sexual violence occurring in situations of enduring violence, repression or deprivation.

While traumatic experiences are highly subjective, CRSV and other forms of violence associated with war are generally experienced as traumatising regardless of cultural or other factors. It should be seen as common that survivors may experience trauma as a result of being subjected to CRSV.

The Annex begins by considering CRSV and how it may impact different groups (women, men, marginalised communities). In Chapter 2, we look at characteristics of trauma in the context
of CRSV and the impact of CRSV on memory. Chapter 3 looks at organisational practices to address risks associated with working with survivors of CRSV. Chapter 4 considers in depth how to develop a trauma-informed lawyer-client relationship in the context of CRSV, beginning with how to organise meetings with clients and gather evidence, and then how to support clients through the legal process, including medical examinations.

This Annex should be read alongside the Global Code of Conduct for Gathering and Using Information about Systematic and Conflict-Related Sexual Violence, often referred to as ‘the Murad Code’. The Murad Code reflects universal, non-negotiable core standards which should be applied by all actors to uphold a survivor-centred approach. In our Annex we reference some of these principles to draw attention to the cross over between the Murad Code and TILP approaches.

Our Guidelines for trauma informed legal practice for lawyers working with adult survivors of human rights violations can be downloaded in English, Ukrainian and Russian.

The post Working with adult survivors of conflict-related sexual violence (Annex to our Guide to Trauma-Informed Legal Practice) appeared first on European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC).

Sexual harassment is a persisting human rights violation. It is a complex phenomenon which predominantly affects women and girls. It results from a culture of gender discrimination, unequal gender relations and power dynamics. As such, it is a form of sexual and gender-based violence and gender discrimination.

Our Guide aims to:

• increase understanding of what constitutes sexual harassment
• provide lawyers with the tools necessary to ensure that cases are dealt with appropriately at the domestic level, and where victims wish to bring claims before regional or international human rights mechanisms these claims are well presented and argued

It identifies the behaviours that may constitute sexual harassment, including unwanted sexual comments or “jokes” in the workplace, “catcalling” or “wolf-whistling” in public spaces, and non-consensual image or video sharing, or threats of doing so in the digital realm.

The post Guide: International Legal Standards on Combatting Sexual Harassment appeared first on European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC).

This Guide intends to assist practitioners new to the process of bringing individual communications before these treaty bodies. Drawing on relevant Treaty Body decisions, General Comments/Recommendations, and Rules of Procedure, our Guide addresses the following areas:

Standing

• Who can submit a written complaint
• Victim status
• Actio popularis
• Representation and consent to act

Jurisdiction

• Subject matter jurisdiction (ratione materiae)
• Temporal jurisdiction (ratione temporis)
• Territorial jurisdiction (ratione loci)

Exhaustion of domestic remedies

Time limits

Other admissibility issues

• Examination of the same matter by another procedure of international investigation or settlement
• Failure to sufficiently substantiate claims
• Abuse of the right of submission or incompatibility with the treaty

You can download our legal guide, ‘Individual Communications to UN Treaty Bodies – Admissibility Issues’ now, in English and Russian language versions.

The post Guide: Individual Communications to UN Treaty Bodies – Admissibility Issues appeared first on European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC).

Enforced disappearances entail the arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the State or by persons or groups of persons acting with a State’s authorisation, support or acquiescence. This is followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person, placing the victim outside the protection of the law.

Our new Guide looks at State obligations in the European context.

PART 1 – Access to justice – looks at:

• The obligation to create an autonomous crime of enforced disappearance in domestic law
• The obligation to investigate acts of enforced disappearances and to bring those responsible to justice
• The general prohibition on amnesties

PART 2 – Measures to prevent enforced disappearances – includes:

• Legal safeguards for persons deprived of liberty
• Prohibition of secret detention and legal safeguards
• The obligation to maintain official registers and to grant access to interested parties
• Inspection of places of deprivation of liberty
• The obligation to train public officials

PART 3 – Rights of victims – focuses on:

• The Right to know the truth and state obligations
• The obligation to search for disappeared persons
• Measures of reparation
• State obligation to clarify the legal situation of disappeared persons and their relatives

The core elements of state responsibility for addressing enforced disappearances have been developed over many decades through international and regional instruments, these include:

• The UN Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances [‘Declaration’], in adopted in 1992, the Declaration is now understood to largely codify and cwonsolidate customary international law that is legally binding on all states.
• International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance [‘ICPPED’]
• The General Comments and reports of the WGEID;
• The General Comments, Reports, Concluding Observations and Views of the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances [‘CED’];
• The Views and Concluding Observations of the UN Human Rights Committee [‘HRC’] whose legal principles apply to all states that have ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [‘ICCPR’];
• In the American human rights system, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights [‘IACtHR’] and Inter-American Commission of Human Rights [‘IACHR’]; and,
• In the European system, the case law of the European Court of Human Rights [‘ECtHR’], applying the rights enshrined in the European Convention of Human Rights [‘ECHR’] with application to all contracting states.

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe [‘PACE’], has noted that it considers the work of the above mechanisms in conjunction with that of the International Commission on Missing Persons, the International Committee of the Red Cross [‘ICRC’] and regional mechanisms such as the Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus to “form a well-developed institutional and normative framework”. It has called on all member states of the Council of Europe [‘CoE’] to take steps to reinforce the existing international legal framework surrounding enforced disappearances and better implement the practices recommended in international mechanisms on enforced disappearances.

The post Guide: Enforced Disappearances in Europe – Obligations of States in International Human Rights Law appeared first on European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC).

In referring to CRSV, we use the following established definition: “rape, sexual slavery, forced prostitution, forced pregnancy, forced abortion, enforced sterilisation, forced marriage, and any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity perpetrated against women, men, girls, or boys that is directly or indirectly linked to a conflict”.

Download the guide: English | Ukrainian | Russian

The link to a conflict may be evident in the profile of the perpetrator; the profile of the victim; the climate of impunity; cross-border consequences, such as displacement or trafficking; and/or violations of the provisions of a ceasefire agreement.

CRSV also encompasses trafficking in persons (the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons for the purpose of exploitation, including of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, of slavery or slavery-like practices, and other forms of exploitation, when committed in situations of conflict).

Acts of sexual violence can constitute human rights violations, atrocity crimes, such as war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocidal acts.

The first section discusses available international human rights law mechanisms: (1) the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR); and (2) UN Committees. The second section discusses criminal law proceedings before (1) the International Criminal Court; (2) the domestic courts in Ukraine; and (3) the domestic courts of countries exercising universal jurisdiction.

The post Briefing Note: An overview of avenues for redress for survivors of conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) in Ukraine appeared first on European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC).

Download the report: English | Ukrainian | Russian

This briefing note outlines: (1) available avenues for bringing complaints against Russia following its expulsion from the Council of Europe, with a particular focus on the UN treaty bodies; (2) options for interim measures and urgent actions; (3) practical considerations when advising clients; and (4) further information and guidance.

It should be noted that the current context in relation to Russia’s engagement with the Council of Europe and ECtHR is developing and subject to change. This briefing note reflects the situation as at 30 June 2022.

The post Briefing note: International avenues for bringing complaints of human rights violations against the Russian Federation after its expulsion from the Council of Europe appeared first on European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC).

For some, enforced disappearance (ED) might sound like a relic of Latin America in the 1970s. Sadly, though, the practice of states ‘disappearing’ opponents or vulnerable minorities remains a global problem. Since 1980, the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID) has transmitted cases relating to 112 States, confirming the prevalence of this crime.

Lawyers litigating ED at the domestic level often find it hard to locate case law from other jurisdictions, and to navigate the jurisprudence of the mechanisms that consider these cases.

A newly-expanded online resource, the Enforced Disappearance Legal Database (EDLD) addresses these challenges by drawing together domestic, regional and international case law as well as a full range of legal standards. Users can undertake targeted legal research and comparative analysis, and explore issues arising under the normative framework of the offence of enforced disappearance.

Jessica Gavron, Co-Director of the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC), which has developed the database, said: “As human rights lawyers, we know the importance of drawing on case law from other jurisdictions to make progressive arguments. For all lawyers, including those working in the national courts, it’s also important to reference international standards, and to understand the threshold we need to reach to secure a positive judgment.

“Enforced disappearance is a systemic issue for many, in our region and around the world. We hope the new, expanded EDLD will help all those seeking justice and accountability for the families of the disappeared.”

The EDLD originally launched in August 2022, the result of a two-year research project completed with input from domestic and international legal experts.

The revised database, launched today to mark the UN International Day of Victims of Enforced Disappearance, has been expanded to include nearly 200 case summaries, drawn from the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights, UN treaty bodies, and a number of domestic courts. The resource is available in English, Spanish, French and Russian.

The updated EDLD also provides international standards on enforced disappearances as set out in international humanitarian law and international criminal law, in addition to the previously-available information on international and regional human rights systems.

The database – the first and only resource of its kind for those seeking to litigate cases involving enforced disappearance – grew out of EHRAC’s own experiences. The independent human rights centre, based in London, works with partners in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Russia and Ukraine to challenge serious human rights violations. It was established in 2003, to litigate violations resulting from the second Russian-Chechen War. In the two decades since, the Centre has worked on over 100 cases involving ED before the European Court of Human Rights and the UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances (UN WGEID).

Jessica Gavron: “Our journey with these cases has been a journey of learning, particularly in relation to the families of the disappeared. We found that we’d get a judgment, we’d secure compensation, but the families remain in this limbo of unknowing – the ongoing inaction of the state responsible might mean they never learn the fate of their relatives.

“The passage of time and the lack of meaningful progress mean you have to go back to the applicants and ask again what they want to do. With their support and consent, we have sent many of our unimplemented cases from the European Court to the UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances, for consideration by a further international body. By this point, the main priority of the applicants is to pursue humanitarian resolution – they want to know the fate and whereabouts of their loved ones in order to have closure.

“Given our experience, we thought it would be valuable to pool what we have learned, to create a database that would help others and connect those working on ED in different regions.”

EHRAC continues to work with its partners to litigate cases involving enforced disappearance.

Jessica Gavron: “ED is an ongoing issue for Russia. What was once a tool of war perpetrated by State Security forces during the two Russian-Chechen wars, is now being used by local law enforcement, to ‘cleanse’ minority groups and dissenters. More recently, we’ve seen the disappearance and torture of members of the LGBT community in Chechnya. The horrendous practice of ED has trickled down into ordinary policing tactics and at the same time been exported to Ukraine, where since 2014, Russia has used ED to target dissenters and members of marginalised groups, including Crimean Tatars, broadening the target group after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.”

“So, for EHRAC, ED is still a live issue, because many of our cases stemming from the second Russian-Chechen war remain unresolved for the applicants and because the practice of enforced disappearance is continuing and broadening in its application.”

The post Unique online resource provides those litigating enforced disappearance with global perspective appeared first on European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC).

The post Guide: Preparing Witness Statements in International Human Rights Litigation appeared first on European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC).