Ukraine Seeks ECHR Ruling on Missing Crimean Children

The European Court of Human Rights has been asked to determine whether Russia is responsible for the forced disappearance of ten Ukrainian children. These minors, who were between one and five years old at the time, lived in state institutions in Crimea before the peninsula was annexed in 2014. According to reports from Courthouse News, their advocates argue that Russian authorities subsequently took control of these institutions and placed the children on adoption websites.

The Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union filed the application in 2023, alleging that the children’s Ukrainian identity was erased and their liberty was unlawfully deprived. While Russia ceased to be a party to the European Convention on Human Rights in 2022, it remains liable for conduct that occurred prior to its expulsion. The court is now assessing whether the claims can proceed despite the significant time gap since the initial events.

Legal arguments over child custody

Counsel for the applicants contends that placing the children with foster or adoptive families constituted a continuation of their deprivation of liberty. Because the children were too young to consent, the union argues they remained under state control without the consent of Ukraine, their legal guardian. The application emphasizes that Russia’s refusal to honor transfer requests and its imposition of citizenship violated the children's right to an identity.

Ukrainian government agent Marharyta Sokorenko highlighted that Moscow holds exclusive access to the official records regarding the children's status. She noted that Russia’s silence in the proceedings is indicative of its possession of the answers. The union has provided evidence suggesting that some children were transferred to institutions in Rostov and Lipetsk, although the final whereabouts of all ten remain unclear.

Judicial review of procedural delays

Judges on the bench questioned the union on the delay between the 2014 annexation and the 2023 filing. The applicants argue that identifying specific children and gathering sufficient evidence for a legal claim took considerable time. They maintain that the violations were continuing in nature, allowing them to file within the four-month deadline calculated from Russia’s departure from the Council of Europe.

Presiding judge Lado Chanturia cautioned that Russia’s absence from the proceedings does not result in an automatic victory for the applicants. The court emphasized that the claims must be substantiated by concrete evidence. The union was given one week to provide written details regarding the online adoption profiles that formed part of their initial evidence.

Next steps in Strasbourg proceedings

The court is currently deliberating on whether the case meets the admissibility criteria and whether Russia violated the children's rights under the convention. No date has been set for a final judgment. The outcome will hinge on the strength of the digital trail provided by the applicants and the court's interpretation of Russia's ongoing responsibility for actions taken during its control of the territory.

Observers will watch closely for the court's decision on admissibility, as it sets a precedent for handling cases involving state-sponsored separation of children. The union maintains that without this application, the violations of the children's rights would have remained unaddressed in an international legal forum. The silence of the Russian delegation leaves the burden of proof entirely on the Ukrainian side.