Site Archive‎ > ‎Unfair Trial‎ > ‎YUKOS Case‎ > ‎

What is in fact written in the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Khodorkovsky case?

Source: (info), 02/06/11

· Yukos Case · Political Prisoners · Moscow City & Moscow Region

Karinna Moskalenko [talking on radio station Echo of Moscow on 2 June 2011]: I have observed this hysteria for a long time now, how they have tried to make a loser out of a winner, in order to understand the nature and origin of this phenomenon....

I have been waiting for the mass psychosis to ease, the madness to end and for at least someone or other to actually think of reading the judgment. The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights on the first application made to the Court by Mikhail Borisovich Khodorkovsky.

Now – Good morning, Everyone!

Do you know what this judgment is about? It is about the fact that Khodorkovsky won virtually all the points made in his application to the Court of 2004. And this is only the very first application, in which violations of important rights have been recognized, of course, but which are still very far from the most important principles involved.

Human rights defenders have given much help to the professional provocateurs.

They, like all other categories of the public, decided not to read the judgment, but not to wait to cast aspersions…

No, of course I understand what’s been going on very well. These people sincerely sympathize with Mikhail Borisovich, and they have been upset that the European Court of Human Rights, as it has been explained to them, has not recognized the political motivations in the case.

But first of all, this is not what the European Court of Human Rights said (they were simply deceived). And, secondly, the European Court of Human Rights is not Amnesty International – the Court does not get involved in politics. It is concerned with violations of human rights. It is for this reason that people apply to the court and it is precisely the violations of human rights that have been fully recognized by the European Court and perfectly spelled out in the reasoning and conclusions of the Court.

And by the way, one must value this judgment for its high legal quality.

A little later I shall touch upon those instances where the Court has found violations, from which it can be seen that, for all the points on which this application was based, the Court has found there were violations.

And all the same, what is this Article 18 and why is it so important (it is important after all!)? And what did the Court do in relation to this Article, the poor thing, that has made some cry and put ashes on their heads, while others gloat and rub their hands with glee?

Nothing special at all! The Court said that, for the Court to find a violation of Article 18, there must be such incontrovertible evidence that it would be better for the Court to apply the highest standards of evidence and not to recognize – at least at this stage – a violation of Article 18, thereby avoiding any accusation of politicization and making the judgment of the Court incontrovertible...

Well, one can only say that this is a very reasonable approach. And after all, we are talking about only the first, and not the only, application made to the Court by Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and in the following applications Article 18 has already been recognized as admissible (Lebedev v Russia [No.2]).

So, would you like a test?

The enemies of Khodorkovsky are celebrating victory, is that what you say?

Just wonderful!

I would suggest to them that, since they have won the case, they should not appeal against the judgment in the Grand Chamber.

Let them not appeal against this judgment and in three months time we shall go to the Supreme Court of Russia, to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.

To force the Russian authorities to execute this decision in full accordance with the 14th Protocol!


But see what happens now! Well? Are they still in agreement??? No? But why not?

Weren’t they saying that Mikhail Khodorkovsky lost everything, and won just on some minor matters…

Of course – the illegal arrest by the FSB forces in Novosibirsk is a minor matter (and here there is obviously no politics, wouldn’t you agree?). The unlawful, long pre-trial detention, and the fact the conditions in which he was kept amounted to inhumane treatment, treatment that was humiliating to personal dignity! (Here there are no politics either!!) Scare tactics, searches of lawyers, unlawful placing of a person in a metal cage at the trial for more than a year, a person who under the law is presumed innocent, the unlawful court hearing on the extension of pre-trial detention – and all of this is deliberately done, at the will of the authorities who – it can be presumed – knew the law, but for some reason violated it...

But at the same time the European Court, taking care to ensure its political neutrality, while recognizing the numerous violations of fundamental human rights does not rush to give confirmation on optional questions….

If all the same there had been lawful, even if only formal, grounds to prosecute, then it would not be possible to say that there is indisputable evidence of violation of Article 18. This is what has been said by the European Court of Human Rights, and not by a member of a Lynch court chaired by Bolobolov, whose ungrammatical spite I happened to see today in the latest issue of The Behemoth. [See a recent article by Dmitry Gololobov in – ed.]

And would you like to laugh still more?

Open…no, listen, don’t be lazy, do read at your leisure, well, for the sake of interest, in order to understand what all these weak-minded people are shouting about, read Article 18 of the Convention – try to find there the words: political motivation, or just one word about politics in any grammatical case!!!

Yes, yes, it is precisely this that I am trying to explain: in Article 18 THERE IS NOT ONE WORD ABOUT POLITICS. So just what are all these ‘victors’ in the case of Khodorkovsky talking about?

Yes, we have been talking about the political prosecution of our client, and we shall continue to do so. We shall in future cases, ever more deeply and incontestably, bring the Court to a conclusion on Article 18. And, possibly, we shall succeed. And if not, we should bear in mind that this Article 18 of the Convention is not in itself a violation, it is an attendant circumstance, important, but attendant!

And violations of the Convention concern Articles 3 and 5, and others yet to come in future judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. And a GREAT NUMBER of violations of human rights by the Russian authorities in relation to Mikhail Khododrkovsky have been indisputably proved by us and recognized by the European Court.

So it is an outstanding judgment. It is a victory of good over evil. And this is only the first stage. Therefore we invite our friends and all people of good will to rejoice that Mikhail Borisovich has already won this very first case – which is only a beginning - and wish him more victories in the future.

And our enemies, let’s not be concerned about them, let them rejoice with their inventions.

Source: Echo of Moscow radio station