Right to life

1. Everyone has the right to life. 2. No one shall be condemned to the death penalty, or executed.

Article 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

Text as of March 2026

Based on research and human rights practice, the following problems in the exercise of this right in Ukraine can be distinguished:

Ukraine has not adequately protected the rights of individuals in detention facilities and social institutions during wartime. Penitentiary institutions were not evacuated, and most lack shelters against missile and bomb attacks. This also applies to individuals who have lived in social institutions such as psychiatric care facilities, geriatric boarding houses, orphanages, and psychoneurological boarding houses.
There are gaps and shortcomings in legislation concerning the guarantees and rights provided to victims. Victims are formally informed of their procedural rights, but these rights are not adequately explained. Victims of violent crimes are not currently included in the category of persons eligible for free legal aid. Clear standards for updating victims on the progress of investigations are lacking, and victims are typically informed only after they submit a request. There is a lack of standardized approaches for supporting victims that effectively minimize the risk of re-traumatization.
Obstacles to the exercise of victims’ right to translation. The legislation does not contain provisions on the right to appeal a decision declining to provide interpretation or translation, as provided for in Article 7 of Directive 2012/29/EU.
The process for informing victims of their right to access support services is inadequate, and the implementation of these services remains slow.
The national mechanism for implementing protection measures against crimes is rarely utilized in practice. Incomplete legislative regulation, insufficient material and technical support, and the lack of a systematic approach to victim protection, as well as reliance on evaluative concepts such as real threat to life, do not meet the requirements of Directive 2012/29/EU. The Directive calls for a timely individual assessment when selecting specific special protection measures.
National legislation does not sufficiently address the right to compensation or provide clear mechanisms for obtaining it.
Challenges in effectively investigating violations of the right to life:
- Repeated refusals to register criminal proceedings, inadequate preservation of primary and collected evidence, poor quality and lengthy forensic examinations, and insufficiently thorough investigations of cases. Additional concerns include frequent violations of procedural law, unresolved contradictions in the evidence, inconsistent conclusions, significant delays in the consideration of cases, and a lack of impartiality in investigations (ECtHR judgments in the cases of Khaylo v. Ukraine, 2009, and Muravskaya v. Ukraine, 2009, and the Khaylo group).
- Failure to protect a journalist whose life was at risk and conduct an ineffective investigation into his murder (ECtHR judgment in the case of Gongadze v. Ukraine, 2005).
- Lack of effective investigations into violent acts against the applicants, including potential motives of racial or religious hatred (ECtHR judgment in the case of Fedorchenko and Lozenko v. Ukraine, 2012, Fedorchenko and Lozenko group).
- Failure to conduct effective investigations into deaths occurring during military service, as noted in ECtHR judgments such as Sergey Shevchenko v. Ukraine, 2006; Mosendz v. Ukraine, 2013; and Shabratskyy and Shabratska v. Ukraine, 2026.
- Excessive length of investigations (ECtHR judgment in the case of Yukhymovych v. Ukraine, 2021).
- Delay in starting the investigation.
- Failure to perform necessary investigative activities or performing them negligently.
- Loss of evidence due to disorganized, inconsistent, and unsystematic storage of case materials.
- Unfounded and repeated change of jurisdiction.
- Inexperience of investigators, particularly in the field of IHL.Disregarding requests from the victim’s representatives to initiate investigative actions and related procedures.

What Ukraine needs to do during its accession to the EU to improve the situation:

To improve the effectiveness of investigations into violations of the right to life, the following actions are recommended:

Reform the law enforcement sector to align with international standards, the EU acquis, and ECtHR case law, with particular attention to strategies for investigating ongoing crimes.
Develop methodological recommendations for a structured investigative approach, including a defined list of mandatory investigative actions.
Align criminal legislation with international standards for the collection and preservation of evidence, including evidence from open sources.
Ensure that victim status is automatically granted upon filing a crime report, and that victims receive clear information about their rights and obligations.
Implement a victim-centered approach to protect victims and witnesses from re-traumatization during the investigation.
Adopt a comprehensive law on the rights of victims of violent crimes. In particular, amend the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine to address the right to free legal aid (Article 56), the right to engage one’s own expert (Article 243), and the right to request an expert examination from the investigating judge (Article 244).

To enforce ECtHR judgments overseen by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, the following measures are required:

Ineffective investigations into the deaths in the Gongadze and Khaylo cases: expedite investigations to meet international standards, ensure the preservation of all materials and evidence, and reinforce disciplinary accountability for investigators and prosecutors who miss deadlines or fail to perform their duties properly.
Crimes motivated by intolerance, as highlighted in the Fedorchenko case, require effective monitoring and a response to hate speech and manifestations of intolerance. Develop investigative standards that address intolerance as a motive. Establish minimum protections to prevent re-traumatization of victims. Collect and publish data on investigations of such crimes. Unfortunately, draft law No. 13597 does not address these issues as registered in parliament in August 2025.
Protecting victims of domestic violence. To implement the Istanbul Convention, Ukraine requires further measures to address fatal cases of domestic violence. For more information, see the section on domestic violence and other violent crimes.
Address the use of force by law enforcement and deaths in detention facilities, as seen in the cases of Mikhalkova, Shchokin, and Matushevskyy: enhance law enforcement officers’ understanding of use-of-force standards and the prohibition of torture; strengthen the State Bureau of Investigation as an independent investigative body; implement the Custody Records system and injury documentation effectively; and ensure prisoner safety and access to independent forensic medical examinations.
Medical negligence (Arskaya case, 2014): ensure effective and impartial investigations, provide access to independent forensic medical examination outside the Ministry of Health, and establish a compensation mechanism for victims.
Deaths of military personnel (Sergey Shevchenko, Mosendz, Shabratskyy, and Shabratska cases): ensure independent investigations are conducted without prematurely closing criminal proceedings. Guarantee the victims the right to engage their own expert, and establish a compensation mechanism if investigations are ineffective.
Failure to provide medical care in detention facilities, resulting in the death of a person (group case Katz and Others v. Ukraine, 2008).

To align with the EU acquis on victims’ rights (Directives 2012/29/EU and 2004/80/EC), it is necessary to:

Adopt legislation on victims’ rights that specifies the right to information, free legal aid, compensation, interpreter services, and protection.
Enhance the protection of victims and witnesses, including safeguarding their personal data, and ensure prompt responses to threats.
Adopt draft law No. 9655, which aims to improve security measures for participants in criminal proceedings. After its adoption by parliament, the President returned the draft law with proposals in May 2025.
Introduce a mechanism to compensate victims of violent crimes, including cases where the accused is a foreign national. Additionally, adopt legislation to provide compensation for victims of violent crimes.

Regarding international protection (Directive 2013/32/EU), it is necessary to:

To address trade in dual-use goods and counter terrorism under EU Regulation 2019/125 and Directive 2017/541, it is necessary to:

Develop a draft law and accompanying regulations to implement Regulation 2019/125, which governs the trade of goods that may be used for torture or capital punishment.
Ensure that criminal law mechanisms are effectively applied to counter terrorism and regulate the circulation of these goods.
Strengthen international cooperation, particularly with Europol, to improve the exchange of investigative practices, evidence collection, and witness protection.

Regarding maritime safety (EU Regulation 2019/1239), it is necessary to:

For a comprehensive overview of these issues and the rationale behind our recommendations, please refer to the research section, specifically the document available in Ukrainian: Right to life: compliance with the principles and norms of the European Union acquis. If you have any feedback or comments about this material, please send them to: hrmap@ccl.org.ua.

Published materials may be used provided that a mandatory link to the original source is included. @ 2025 Center for Civil Liberties.

Experts

Yuliia Kovalenko

Doctor of Philosophy in International Law, attorney, lawyer of the Strategic Affairs Center of the UHHRU, expert in international law and human rights

The Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union (UHHRU)