National Preventive Mechanisms Against Torture in Ukraine: What was it? What is it? What should it be?

“Soviet” legacy: Systematic torture (ill-treatment at institutions of detention - /ID/) Departmental control as a system to conceal violation of human rights “Prosecutor’s oversight” as profanation of human rights protection Non-transparent and closed ID Inefficient legal assistance and artificial restrictions (monopoly of legal assistance providers) No efficient mechanisms of parliamentary control Passive civil society and limited mechanisms of civil monitoring (control)

First steps: Ukraine’s accession to the Council of Europe (1995) Adoption of the Constitution of Ukraine (1996) ECtHR jurisdiction covers Ukraine (1997) Institution of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Human Rights (1997) Adoption of the Law “On Democratic Civil Control of the National Military and Law Enforcement” (2003) OPCAT ratification (2006)

Challenges for NPM in Ukraine Overwhelming number of prison population (>1 million) No “inventory” of detention institutions (insufficient fulfillment of Clause 4 of Presidential Decree №950/2011 ) Widespread corruption and economic factors promoting Ill-Treatment (forced labor, lack of budget transparency, monopolies etc) No regulation of NPM functions on legislative level (e.g. conformity problems between CPT authority, Cl ause 4 of Presidential Decree №950/2011, and Article 24 of Criminal Executive Code of Ukraine as well as Article12,13 of the Law of Ukraine “On Preliminary Detention”) No reporting of public authorities to NPM Problems of NPM integration and interaction with the existent mechanisms of public and departmental control of human rights Drawbacks of the Law of Ukraine “ On Parliamentary Commissioner for Human Rights ” (role of Ombudsman vis-a-vis NPM is unclear, problems with delegating monitoring competencies, limited possibilities of the Ombudsman to represent violated human rights of ill- treatment victims) Absence of funding and well-trained personnel to provide effective monitoring Insufficient number or prepared civic activists interested in cooperation with NPM

NPM forerunners successful and failed ones : “Mobile teams” (MIA ) Civic Councils at MIA and State Penitentiary Service of Ukraine members with competences and without Ad hoc initiatives of Prosecutor General on joint visits to institutions of detention with civil society organizations Provisions of Clause 9.2 of PGU Decree №7 of 06/4/2011 Ad hoc initiatives of the Ombudsman on joint visits to places of detention with civil society representatives Commission on Prevention of Torture (Presidential Decree №950/2011)

Features of effective NPM in Ukraine (part 1) Authority (mandate), mechanisms of establishment, procedures for cooperation with public authorities and civil society shall be determined by LAW = guaranty of the NPM functional independence Financial independence, enhanced by absence of private financial interests of NPM members in their work Personal independence of NPM members Combination of research monitoring with individual reaction to violation of human rights Rights to hold officials administratively liable for non- cooperation with NPM Full access to detainees and all the files

Features of efficient NPM in Ukraine (part 2) Cooperation with external experts (local and foreign ones) “Mandatory expert duties” of NPM (e.g. obligatory NPM comments of every legal initiative related to ill-treatment) Permanent contacts between NPM and SPT (Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture) Secure right to direct and confidential access to NPM for every detainee Obligation to react to all NPM comments and recommendations, and liability for non-reaction to NPM actions

Ombudsman at the epicenter of NPM activity Drastic reform of the Ombudsman’s institution in Ukraine - Authority to cooperate, interact and – if needed – coordinate NPM - Public budget allocations to fund regional and sectoral representatives of the Ombudsman (children’s rights, rights of minorities, patients’ rights etc.) - Legislative enhancement of Ombudsman’s procedural capabilities (representation of citizens’ interests at national Courts of Justice)

Thank You for your attention! Dmytro Groysman Vinnytsia Human Rights Group Coordinator