The European Court accepted 230 land complaints from residents of Crimea

Just before the new year, December 15, 2021, The European Court of Human Rights has decided communicate complaints from 230 residents of the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol who challenge the confiscation of their private property, land plots and real estate on the peninsula.

“Between 2004 and 2012, Ukrainian local authorities allocated the relevant land plots to the applicants or, in some cases, their previous owners for permanent use and authorized their privatization. In most cases, the legality of land allocations was subject to judicial review and was ultimately confirmed by final decisions of Ukrainian courts. By the time the Russian Federation asserted jurisdiction over Crimea in 2014, most of the applicants/previous owners had completed the privatization process and registered full ownership of the land plots in accordance with Ukrainian law.

When the Russian Federation asserted its jurisdiction over Crimea in 2014... the new legal regime required that all real estate in Crimea and Sevastopol (whether publicly or privately owned or in use) and the necessary ownership rights thereto be re-registered in accordance with Russian law in relevant registers and cadastres.

Many applicants have successfully re-registered their ownership rights to the above-mentioned land plots in accordance with Russian law.

Some of them sold land plots to third parties after re-registration. Others acquired disputed land plots after their previous owners had fully formalized their ownership rights in accordance with Russian law.

However, at various points between 2015 and 2018, the Russian authorities filed lawsuits against the applicants with the aim of recognizing their land plots as state property and canceling their property rights.

They argued that the provision of the disputed land plots to private individuals for permanent use was not fully consistent with Ukrainian legislation in force at that time.

In some cases, this was due to the fact that, in the opinion of the Russian authorities, the land plots should have been considered part of forestry, historical, cultural or park areas and, as such, they should not have been transferred from public to private hands.

Since, according to the Russian authorities, the initial grant of land plots for permanent use by the Ukrainian authorities to private individuals was illegal, their subsequent privatization, subsequent registration and re-registration of property rights, as well as any other documents of ownership were invalid. Consequently, they argued, the applicants' property rights should be declared invalid and the land should be requisitioned from the present owners...

In some cases, it was the Russian Ministry of Defense that laid claim to certain land plots, arguing that they should be considered to be within the boundaries of old military formations, which the Russian Ministry of Defense now has the right to fully and solely own.

In addition, the Russian authorities argued that the original decisions of the Ukrainian authorities, according to which the land plots were allocated to the applicants or previous owners, were not in the official archives...

Russian courts satisfied these requirements,” says the annotation published on the ECHR website.

However, Gennady Basov, head of the Russian Bloc public organization, which participated in legal assistance in filing claims, claims that land plots were often seized from owners illegally.

According to him, in many cases the complaints relate to conflict situations when the confiscation of land occurred in the interests of corrupt officials.

“They redistributed property, disregarding the norms of Russian legislation with impunity. This was often done by temporary officials who arrived in Crimea, who were puzzled by only one goal - profit,” says the social activist.

According to Basov, the illegal activities of such officials “discredit the state and allow Russia’s enemies to focus on legal lawlessness.”

He believes that the plaintiffs have a chance to win the case in the ECHR and obtain compensation.

“By the way, the overwhelming majority of complaints accepted by the European Court concern violations committed in Sevastopol and filed by Sevastopol residents,” Basov clarified.

The social activist clarified that the recently approved amendments to the Constitution do not mean that Russia will ignore the decision of the European Court.

“That's not entirely true. The Russian state reserves the right not to recognize decisions of international bodies if they contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Decisions on the discrepancy between a decision of an international body and Russian legislation are made by the Constitutional Court.

To date, I know of only one such decision, and it concerns the shareholders of the YUKOS company. According to this decision, Russia is obliged to pay three billion US dollars to the shareholders of the Yukos company.

As for other decisions, they are implemented by Russia, and the Constitutional Court does not consider issues related, for example, to police provocation.

Moreover, Russia recently filed a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights against Ukraine - on issues related to violations of the rights of Crimeans, Sevastopol residents and residents of Donbass. Based on this complaint, it has every chance to recover from this non-state not only material damage, but, more importantly, on the basis of such a decision, to put more significant emphasis on the international community,” Basov said.

He does not agree that filing a claim with European structures, which often make politically motivated decisions against Russia, is a sign of a lack of patriotism.

“The decisions of the European Court, given the weakness of Russian justice, are one of the few tools to force Russian officials to remember the law. And true patriots are precisely those who help the state to be truly legal in all its forms and manifestations. Only a rule-of-law state can provide comfortable living for its citizens,” says Basov.

He clarified that the Russian Bloc will continue to file claims - anyone can contact the organization email.

“Anyone who wants to defend their interests in the ECHR can contact us by email. Yes, it won’t be cheap, but I judge from myself that it will be effective,” says Basov.