Doc. 7974

23 December 1997

Honouring of the commitments by Ukraine to introduce a moratorium on executions and abolish the death penalty

Report

Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights

Rapporteur: Mrs Renate Wohlwend, Liechtenstein, Group of the European People’s Party

Summary

On 29 January 1997, the Assembly considered the honouring of the commitment entered into by Ukraine upon accession to the Council of Europe to put into place a moratorium on executions, since it had received official information on continuing executions in Ukraine. In Resolution 1112 (1997), the Assembly warned the Ukrainian authorities “that it will take all necessary steps to ensure compliance with commitments entered into”, including, if necessary, the non-ratification of the credentials of the Ukrainian parliamentary delegation at its next session in January 1998.

The Rapporteur was instructed to find out whether the terms of Resolution 1112 (1997) had been fulfilled. In Kyiv, she received official information from the Deputy Minister of the Interior that 13 executions took place between 1 January 1997 and 11 March 1997 (making the total official death toll for 1996 and 1997 rise to 180). Due to the fact that all information regarding executions constitute a state secret in Ukraine, the Rapporteur has only been given very patchy information: she cannot be sure that a moratorium on executions really exists in Ukraine.

The Ukrainian parliamentary delegation has been warned three times already by the Assembly over a period of over two years what consequences further violation of the commitment to institute a moratorium on executions on 9 November 1995, and especially violation of Resolution 1112 (1997) could have.

Thus this report proposes that the Assembly, in the absence of an official notification by the President and the Speaker of Parliament of Ukraine notifying the Council of Europe the imposition of a de jure moratorium on executions, decide not to ratify the credentials of the Ukrainian parliamentary delegation.

The credentials of the delegation may only be ratified at a later date when the Ukrainian authorities have lifted the secrecy surrounding executions and have furnished documentary and undeniable proof that a moratorium on executions has been established in Ukraine.

I.       Draft resolution

1. The Assembly recalls its Opinion No. 190 (1995) on the application by Ukraine for membership of the Council of Europe, adopted on 26 September 1995, which noted that Ukraine committed itself to “put into place, with immediate effect from the day of accession, a moratorium on executions”. Ukraine acceded to the Council of Europe on 9 November 1995, but did not institute a moratorium on executions.

2. On 28 June 1996, the Assembly held a debate on the abolition of the death penalty in Europe, and adopted Resolution 1097 (1996), in which the Assembly condemned Ukraine for apparently violating its commitment to introduce a moratorium on executions and warned Ukraine that further violations of her commitments, especially the carrying out of executions, would have consequences. Nevertheless, executions have continued in Ukraine.

3. On 29 January 1997, the Assembly was forced to once again consider the honouring of the commitment entered into by Ukraine upon accession to the Council of Europe to put into place a moratorium on executions, since it had received official information on continuing executions in Ukraine. In Resolution 1112 (1997), the Assembly warned the Ukrainian authorities “that it will take all necessary steps to ensure compliance with commitments entered into”, including, if necessary, the non-ratification of the credentials of the Ukrainian parliamentary delegation at its next session in January 1998.

4. The Assembly has now received official confirmation that executions continued after 29 January 1997. It is shocked that at least 13 executions took place in Ukraine in 1997. It strongly condemns these executions which constitute, once again, a blatant violation of the commitments entered into by Ukraine upon accession to the Council of Europe and of Resolution 1112 (1997).

5. The Assembly demands that no more executions be carried out under any circumstances whatsoever.

6. It also demands that a de jure moratorium be introduced in Ukraine.

7. It demands that the unnecessary and inhuman secrecy surrounding executions in Ukraine be lifted without further delay and that a list of all those who have been under the sentence of death since the accession of Ukraine to the Council of Europe on 9 November 1995 and their ultimate fate be made public.

8. It further demands that the death penalty be abolished by parliament as soon as a new parliament has been elected and that the President pardon all current death-row inmates.

9. The Assembly is also shocked by the appalling conditions in which prisoners condemned to death are held. It insists that all death-row inmates immediately be allowed one hour’s exercise outside in fresh air per day. Lights should be installed in death row cells that can be turned down at night; where possible, daylight should be allowed to get into the cells as well as fresh air.

10. It recommends that, in the long term, prisoners be given the possibility to complain about ill treatment in detention to an independent body other than the prosecutor’s office.

11. The Assembly is willing to grant Ukraine all the assistance within its means to help Ukraine achieve these goals and to honour this particular commitment.

12. Ukraine was clearly warned in Resolution 1112 (1997) of the consequences any further execution after 29 January 1997 could have. Recalling that executions continued at least until 11 March 1997, the Assembly, in the absence of an official notification by the President and the Speaker of Parliament of Ukraine notifying to the Council of Europe the imposition of a de jure moratorium on executions, decides not to ratify the credentials of the Ukrainian parliamentary delegation.

13. The credentials of the delegation may only be ratified at a later date when the Ukrainian authorities have lifted the secrecy surrounding executions and have furnished documentary and undeniable proof that a moratorium on executions has been established in Ukraine.

II.       Draft order

The Assembly, referring to its Resolution … (1998) on the honouring of the commitments by Ukraine to introduce a moratorium on executions and abolish the death penalty, instructs its Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights to evaluate the proof to be furnished by the Ukrainian authorities that a moratorium on executions has been established, and to report back to it as soon as such proof has been received.

III.       Explanatory memorandum by Mrs Wohlwend

A.       Introduction

1. Upon the accession of their country to the Council of Europe on 9 November 1995, the Ukrainian authorities committed themselves to immediately put into place a moratorium on executions, and to abolish the death penalty completely within three years by ratifying Protocol No 6 to the European Convention on Human Rights.1 When it appeared that Ukraine had not respected its commitment to put into place a moratorium on executions, the Assembly held a debate on the abolition of the death penalty in Europe on 28 June 1996, and adopted Resolution 1097 (1996). In this resolution, the Assembly condemned Ukraine for apparently violating its commitment to introduce a moratorium on executions and warned Ukraine that further violations of her commitments, especially the carrying out of executions, would have consequences. Nevertheless, executions continued in Ukraine.

2. Thus the Assembly decided to hold an urgent debate at the January 1997 part-session on the honouring of the commitment entered into by Ukraine upon accession to the Council of Europe to put into place a moratorium on executions, during which it adopted Resolution 1112 (1997)2.

3. In this Resolution, the Assembly condemned Ukraine for having violated her commitment to put into place a moratorium on executions, and deplored the 89 executions that had already taken place in the first half of 1996. It declared itself particularly shocked by the information that executions in Ukraine are shrouded in secrecy, with apparently not even the families of the prisoners being informed, and that the executed are reportedly buried in unmarked graves. The Assembly demanded that Ukraine immediately honour her commitments and halt any executions still pending. Should any more executions of the death penalty be carried out following the adoption of the resolution, the Assembly warned that it may consider the non-ratification of the credentials of the Ukrainian parliamentary delegation at its next session in January 1998.

4. This session now coming up, it was my duty to verify whether any more executions had taken place in Ukraine following the adoption of Resolution 1112 (1997) on 29 January 1997. At first it seemed that a moratorium on executions had effectively been put into place after the Assembly’s stern warning (indeed, Ukraine signed Protocol No 6 to the European Convention on Human Rights, abolishing the death penalty in peacetime, on 5 May 1997). The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine submitted to the parliament a draft Criminal Code of Ukraine which did not envisage the death penalty (on 12 June 1997), a draft law “On the supplements and amendments to the Criminal Code of Ukraine” abolishing the death penalty in times of peace (on 26 June 1997), and a draft law on the ratification of Protocol No. 6 to the ECHR (in October 1997). Unfortunately, parliament did not enact these laws to my knowledge.

5. At the end of the summer news of executions having taken place secretly in 1997 started to leak out. Some NGOs contacted me, including Amnesty International, concerned that they had had no news from certain death-row prisoners for a long time, making them fear that they had been executed. Even more worrying, the former Ukrainian Minister of Justice, Mr Serhiy Holovatiy, declared to the press in August that 13 executions had taken place in the first half of 1997, even naming the precise regions where they had been carried out.

6. Two Deputy Ministers of Justice, Mr Khandurin and Mr Pukshin, confirmed this information to deputies of the Verkhovna Rada (the parliament) and NGO activists in August 1997 in writing. However, when these letters were made available to the public, an international outcry followed, in the wake of which the Deputy Ministers retracted their statements and blamed the “false” information on a statistical error. Confusion reigned until the beginning of October 1997, when the President of Ukraine informed Mrs Fischer during the Second Summit of the Council of Europe that he had not refused mercy to any death-row inmate since 29 November 1996. However, he also stated that the last execution in Ukraine took place in March 1997. Despite attempts by both the Assembly President and the Secretary General to obtain more precise official information on this matter, no further light was shed by officials on the alleged breaking of the moratorium.

7. Thus I was instructed by the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights to go on a fact-finding mission to Ukraine. This mission took place on 5-7 November 1997. The programme (reproduced as Appendix II) was very well organised by the Ukrainian authorities, and I was able to meet with the Minister of Justice, the Deputy Minister of the Interior, the Prosecutor General and the Ukrainian parliamentary delegation. I was also given ample written information and was allowed to visit three pre-trial detention centres in different parts of the country, and to meet with death-row inmates I had asked to see in two of these pre-trial detention centres.3 I was told by the high officials I spoke to during my visit that a de facto moratorium on executions was in place since 11 March 1997.

8. In the meantime, however, I have been informed of rumours currently circulating in Ukraine that the moratorium on executions is not being observed and that at least one execution still took place after Ukraine signed the 6th Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights4, on 2 June 1997. I asked the Rapporteurs of the Monitoring Committee, Mrs Severinsen and Mr Kelam, who visited Ukraine from 7 to 11 December 1997, to try to obtain official confirmation of this information from the Ukrainian side. Unfortunately, possibly because all data on executions is considered a state secret in Ukraine, the Rapporteurs were not given the full picture on executions in 1997, either.

9. In the following, I shall explain the procedure of how death sentences are confirmed and carried out in Ukraine, comment on the conditions I saw on death row, and outline the statistical information given to me by officials during my visit. In conclusion, I shall make some suggestions to the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights on the further action I consider the Committee and the Assembly should take on this matter.

B. Statistical information on the death penalty and executions

10. According to information given to me by the Deputy Minister of the Interior, Mr Tereshchuk, there are currently 264 prisoners on death row in Ukraine. Their number is continuously rising because the Ukrainian courts continue to hand down death sentences, which are, however, no longer carried out. All of the high officials I saw confirmed that a de facto moratorium5 on executions was currently in place. This moratorium is reported to have been established by the President, who is no longer refusing requests for pardon, but is either granting them (only a few), or simply not considering them (the majority of cases).

11. All the high officials I met confirmed that the President had last rejected appeals for mercy on 29 November 1996. However, only the Deputy Minister of the Interior was willing to admit that executions in Ukraine had continued until 11 March 1997. In fact, 13 prisoners were executed between 1 January 1997 and 11 March 1997 – the requests for pardon of whom had been rejected on 29 November 1996. In other words, it took up to four months to execute the death sentences of these prisoners once the President had rejected their pleas for mercy.

12. Before the visit, I had sent to the Ukrainian authorities a list of 30 names6 I had gathered from non-governmental sources, names of prisoners on death row whom these sources believed to be in imminent danger of execution or already dead. The Ministry of the Interior informed me of the whereabouts of ten of these death-row inmates, of whom I asked to see five, in three different cities. However, the Ministry of the Interior claimed not to know of the whereabouts of the other 20 prisoners I had asked about, and referred me to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, in turn, informed us that one of these prisoners had been pardoned by the President on 7 March 1997, the request for mercy of one other prisoner had not yet been examined by the President, and that they had no information whatsoever on one other prisoner7. Between 17 December 1994 and 25 September 1996, the President had rejected the requests of pardon of the other 17 prisoners. Since it takes the Ministry of the Interior up to 3-4 months to execute these death sentences, these 17 death-row inmates have to be considered dead.

13. I asked all the high officials I met for a list of names and dates of the 13 executions which were carried out this year, but I was just sent in a circle (the Minister of Justice referred me to the Ministry of the Interior, who in turn referred me to the Supreme Court, who referred me back to the Ministry of the Interior, and so on). Since it does seem that it is the Ministry of the Interior which actually carries out the executions in practice, and since the Ministry of the Interior was the most open and co-operative institution I met, I sent a letter to the Deputy Minister, asking him once again for this list8. I have not received an answer to this date.

14. However, the Rapporteurs of the Monitoring Committee were provided with the name of one of the prisoners executed on 24 February 1997. General Shtanko of the Ministry of the Interior denied the rumour that a further execution took place on 2 June 1997. The Minister of Justice said that in any case, no executions took place after she took office in August 1997. The Prosecutor-General handed the Rapporteurs of the Monitoring Committee a list on the fate of those people sentenced to death in 1996 and 1997, according to which all executions that took place in 1997 were of prisoners sentenced in 1995 or 1996, so that the prisoners sentenced this year are still alive. Frankly, it does not matter to me at all when a prisoner was sentenced, be it in 1995, 1996, 1997 or earlier. It is the date of his execution that matters. And there were executions in 1997.

C. Procedure of how death sentences are confirmed and carried out in Ukraine

15. The court of first instance that can hand down death sentences in Ukraine is the regional (“oblast”) court. According to all the people I met in Ukraine, including the prisoners on death row, lawyers are usually present during the trials at regional court level, although they are not always present during the first days of police custody, interrogation and investigation. Few prisoners can, however, afford the services of a lawyer to help them draw up an appeal to the Supreme Court (the court of second instance in death-penalty cases), so most prisoners seem to draw up their appeals to the Supreme Court themselves.

16. If the Supreme Court confirms the death sentence (which it seems to do in most cases), the inmate has five days in which to appeal to President Kouchma for mercy. If the prisoner himself does not draw up an appeal for mercy9, the prison governor is obliged to draw up an appeal on his behalf. The President, advised by a special pardon commission, has the right to pardon the death-row inmates and commute their sentences (most often to 20-year terms of imprisonment, life imprisonment not being foreseen by Ukraine’s criminal justice system).

17. If the President refuses to pardon the prisoner, he informs the Supreme Court of this decision, which in turn instructs the Ministry of the Interior to carry out the death sentence. In practice, a special unit of the Ministry of the Interior (called the “convoi”) will arrive at the pre-trial detention centre where the prisoner is held. The prison governor is then obliged to turn over the inmate to the convoi (without prior notification of either the governor or the inmate, so it seems). The inmate is then transferred to an unknown destination where he is shot dead.

18. The Ministry of the Interior then informs the Supreme Court in writing that the sentence has been carried out. It has five days to do so. The Supreme Court sends back the whole file to the (regional) court of first instance, which has the task of informing the relatives of the inmate of the execution within ten days of receipt of the file. The regional courts draw up statistics bi-annually on executions, which seem to be sent to the Ministry of Justice, the Supreme Court and possibly also to the Prosecutor-General. To whom these statistics are sent was very unclear.

19. The whole procedure is shrouded in secrecy. The State Committee on Secrets, chaired by a Deputy Minister of the Interior, has declared the following data to be state secrets: information on management, conditions and supervision of places of imprisonment, including corrective medical institutions and other punitive institutions where sentenced persons work (Article 4.47 of the list of data considered as state secrets of Ukraine), and information regarding executions of capital punishment, the organisation of the execution and burial, the place of execution, the place of burial and the people who have carried out the execution (Article 4.48 of the same list).

20. In conformity with these rules, relatives of executed prisoners are not informed where their sons, husbands or fathers are buried, which I consider an affront to human dignity. Even prison governors receive their information on executions (including on the moratorium currently in force) from the media. Information given to us by two local prison governors who told me that the Ministry of the Interior in Kyiv had sent a letter to all regional prison administrations about the existence of the moratorium unfortunately turned out to be false. The Ministry of the Interior informed us that no such letter existed, and that none would be drawn up, the moratorium being unofficial.

D.       Conditions on death row

21. I am very grateful to the Ukrainian authorities for allowing me to visit three pre-trial detention centres of my choice in which prisoners sentenced to death were held: Donetsk pre-trial detention centre No 1, Simferopol pre-trial detention centre and Khmelnitsky pre-trial detention centre. I was permitted to see death-row cells in all three pre-trial detention centres, and to talk to the death-row inmates I had asked to see in Donetsk and Simferopol. However, the three death-row inmates I had wanted to meet in Khmelnitsky had signed a paper stating that they did not want to meet me.

22. The conditions in the three pre-trial detention centres I visited varied slightly. The internal regulations of the Ministry of the Interior mandate the following:

23. There were 36 death-row inmates in pre-trial detention centre No 1 in Donetsk. Two of these were kept in single cells, the rest in double cells. The cell I saw was a double cell, extremely small, with one bunk-bed, one other bed, one (open) toilet, one washbasin with cold water and one light which was switched on day and night. There was some fresh air through a ventilation system, but no daylight, and practically no room to move around. Inmates are allowed to shower once every ten days, and read books from the prison library. They are woken at 5 am and given three meals a day through the hatch. They are constantly watched through a peephole in the door, allowing them not a minute’s privacy. The inmate I spoke to had lived in these conditions since 19 November 1992.

24. There were 28 death-row inmates in Simferopol pre-trial detention centre, all kept in double cells. The cell I saw was a double cell of acceptable size, but with not a single piece of furniture. There were only three concrete platforms in the concrete floor that served as beds, and a rather dirty (open) toilet with cold water flowing into it constantly instead of a washbasin. There was a shuttered window through which fresh air could get through, and a light which was left on day and night. Inmates are allowed a hot shower once every five days, and to read books, newspapers and magazines of their choice. Security seemed a little less tight.

25. There were six death-row inmates in Khmelnitsky pre-trial detention centre, all of whom were kept in single cells. The (empty) cell I was shown was of acceptable size, had two bunk beds and was adequately furnished, it had a wooden floor, and there was an (open) toilet and a washbasin. There was a shuttered window through which some fresh air filtered, but no daylight. Inmates are allowed a shower once a week, and are allowed to read books, newspapers and magazines. It was my impression that some pressure had been exerted upon the three inmates who had declined to meet with me10, and that they were afraid. The mother of one of the inmates I had wanted to visit, whom I met outside the prison, corroborated this impression on the spot. She also sent me a letter some days ago once again expressing her fear that her son had been prevented from meeting me. This mother was also afraid that her son was being denied medical aid, and alleged that he was tortured by repeated five-minute beatings by masked men.

E.       Conclusions

26. I was shocked to find out that thirteen executions had taken place in Ukraine this year, particularly because some (high) officials were not willing to tell me so openly and honestly.

27. I was equally shocked by the inhumane and degrading conditions on Ukraine’s death rows, as well as by the secrecy surrounding the death penalty and executions in the country. Both of these problems must be tackled without further delay by the authorities.

28. Originally, I was very glad to have been told that no more executions had taken place since 11 March 1997. Unfortunately, I have doubts now on the truth of this statement: In general, not withstanding the fact that executions are shrouded in secrecy and there is a prison-term foreseen for divulging such secrets, NGOs such as Amnesty International usually find out about executions having taken place about 6 months after the fact. The sources of this information are either the relatives of the executed, or “leaks” in the administration, be it in the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of the Interior or another government body who has access to the bi-annual statistics on the death penalty (put together in January and July of each year).

29. The information on executions that I received, as outlined in the first chapter of this report, followed the same pattern. In August, rumours began circulating about executions having taken place in January; in October, on executions having taken place in March; and now in December, on executions meant to have taken place in June. The first reaction of the Ukrainian authorities has so far been a knee-jerk denial each time. But up to now, months later they have always had to admit to the executions in the end, albeit reluctantly. How am I meant to handle the most recent information of the execution on 2 June 1997 now? Can I believe the denial the rapporteurs of the Monitoring Committee were given by the Ukrainian authorities this week? Do I have to wait for another six months to finally receive confirmation of this particular execution? Only to find out in a few months time that there have also been other executions later this year?11

30. I feel I cannot trust the Ukrainian authorities any more. At the beginning, I was willing to accept that executions took place until 11 March 1997, even though this was a clear violation of Resolution 1112 (1997), which explicitly states that any execution12 taking place after 29 January 1997 would lead to the non-ratification of credentials of the Ukrainian parliamentary delegation to the Assembly in January 1998. But I am not willing to accept any more executions after the date of 11 March 1997. Since it will most probably prove impossible for me and the Rapporteurs of the Monitoring Committee to find out whether there were truly any more executions after 11 March 1997 in time for the January 1998 part-session, I am going to have to assume the worst. I think that the Assembly must show that it does not accept to be lied to, or to be given information with a delay of six months or more. The Ukrainian parliamentary delegation has been warned three times already by the Assembly over a period of over two years what consequence further violation of this particular commitment would have. It is not enough to issue another warning; this would endanger the Assembly’s credibility.

31. Thus I conclude that the threat made in Resolution 1112 (1997) must be carried out, and that the Assembly should consider the non-ratification of credentials of the Ukrainian parliamentary delegation at its next session.

F. Recommendations

32. I suggest that a debate be held on this question during the January 1998 part-session of the Assembly, on the basis of this report. The Assembly should condemn the executions which have taken place this year in blatant violation of the commitments entered into by Ukraine upon accession to the Council of Europe and of Resolution 1112 (1997). It should further:

33. The Assembly should point out that Ukraine was clearly warned in Resolution 1112 (1997) of the consequences any further execution after 29 January 1997 would have. Recalling that executions continued at least until 11 March 1997, it should then proceed to the non-ratification of the credentials of the Ukrainian parliamentary delegation.

34. The credentials of the delegation may only be ratified at a later date when the Ukrainian authorities have furnished documentary and undeniable proof that a moratorium on executions has been established in Ukraine. The Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights will evaluate such proof, and recommend the ratification of the credentials of the Ukrainian parliamentary delegation to the Assembly when it has been established that a moratorium on executions exists in Ukraine.

Appendix I

Resolution 1112 (1997)

Appendix II

Programme of the visit to Ukraine of the Rapporteur on the abolition of the death penalty, Mrs Renate Wohlwend, accompanied by Mrs Tanja Kleinsorge

5-7 November 1997

Wednesday 5 November 1997

13 h 05       Arrival at Kyiv Borispol airport

14 h 15       Lunch with Mr Holovatiy, Ukrainian Legal Foundation (unofficial)

15 h       Meeting with Mrs Stanik, Minister of Justice

16 h 15       Meeting with Mr Litvak, Prosecutor-General

17 h 30       Meeting with the Ukrainian Parliamentary Delegation to the Council of Europe

20 h       Working dinner (unofficial), meeting with representatives of civil society:

Thursday 6 November 1997

9 h       Meeting with Mr Tereshchuk, Deputy Minster of the Interior

10 h 30       Flight to Donetsk

12 h 30       Meeting with death-row inmates in Donetsk pre-trial detention centre

16 h 30       Flight to Simferopol

19 h       Meeting with death-row inmates in Simferopol pre-trial detention centre

22 h       Flight to Kyiv

24 h       Arrival at Kyiv airport

Friday 7 November 1997

9 h       Flight to Khmelnitsky

10 h 30       Meeting with the Prison Governor of the Khmelnitsky pre-trial detention centre

13 h       Flight to Kyiv

Appendix III

Letter from Mrs Renate Wohlwend, Rapporteur of the Committee on Legal AffairS and Human Rights on the abolition of the death penalty, to Mr Tereshchuk, Deputy Minister of the Interior of Ukraine, dated 17 November 1997

…

I would like to thank you very much for meeting me on 6 November 1997 and for your honesty and openness during that meeting. I very much appreciated the opportunity you gave me to visit the pre-trial detention centres in Donetsk, Simferopol and Khmelnitsky.

Your colleague, Mr Valentin Nabiklin, who accompanied us, was of great help to me during these visits.

However, following these visits, I have two further requests to you:

1. You informed me that 13 executions had taken place in 1997, but that only the Supreme Court would have further information on the actual executions (the names, dates and places). The Supreme Court subsequently informed me that it had no such information, and that only the Ministry of the Interior would dispose of such a list. Please could you send me the list of names, dates and places of execution by 1 December 1997.

2. I was quite worried by the fact that I was unable to speak to the three inmates of Khmelnitsky pre-trial detention centre. In particular, the mother of Mr Mykola Khokhlich is afraid that her son is not receiving adequate medical attention. I would be very grateful if, as an exceptional case, you could allow an independent doctor (from outside the prison) to examine Mr Khokhlich, to allay his mother’s fears.

Thanking you very much for your kind cooperation, I remain,

Reporting committee: Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights

Budgetary implications for the Assembly: none

Reference to committee: Order No;525 (1996)

Draft resolution adopted by the committee on 15 December 1997 with 16 votes in favour, 3 votes against and 4 abstentions

Draft order adopted by the committee on 15 December 1997 with 19 votes in favour, 3 votes against and 1 abstention

Members of the committee: Mr Hagĺrd (Chairperson), MM Schwimmer, Bindig Jansson (Vice-Chairpersons), Mrs Aguiar, MM Ahlmann-Ohlsen, Akçali, Arzilli, Aushev, Bartumeu Cassany, Besostri, Clerfayt, Columberg, Contestabile, Deasy, Dees (alternate: Mr Jurgens), Demetriou, Mrs Dumont, Mrs Err, MM Fogas, Forni, Mrs Frimannsdóttir, MM Frunda, Fuhrmann, Fydorov, Mrs Gelderblom-Lankhout, Ms Jäätteenmäki, MM Jaskiernia, Jeambrun, Kelam, Lord Kirkhill, MM Kostytsky, Kovacevic, Loutfi, Magnusson, de Marco, Martins, McNamara, Mészáros, Micheloyiannis, Mozetic, Nastase, Németh, Oleksy, Pantelejevs, Pavlov, Mrs Plechatá, MM Pollo, Polydoras, Poppe, Rhinow, Robles Fraga, Rodeghiero (alternate: Mr Speroni), Simonsen, Solé Tura (alternate: Mrs Calleja), Solonari, Staciokas, Lord Steel, MM Sungur, Symonenko, Tahiri, Vishnyakov, Vyvadil, Weyts, Wittmann, Mrs Wohlwend.

N.B. The names of those members who were present during the vote are printed in italics.

Secretaries to the committee: Mr Plate, Ms Coin and Ms Kleinsorge

1 See the Parliamentary Assembly’s Opinion No 190 (1995), § 12.ii.

2 Resolution 1112 (1997) on the honouring of the commitment entered into by Ukraine upon accession to the Council of Europe to put into place a moratorium on executions (see Appendix I).

3 My special thanks go to the German Consul in Kyiv, Mr Schnakenberg, who was of great assistance with the travel arrangements.

4 Ukraine signed this protocol on 5 May 1997.

5 A moratorium is called a de jure moratorium when there is a legal act (e.g. a law passed by parliament or a decree of the President) establishing that executions are no longer allowed. A moratorium is called a de facto moratorium when no such legal act exists, but executions are nevertheless not carried out.

6 For reasons of the protection of privacy, I will not name the prisoners concerned in this report, although I do have the exact names.

7 I was very worried about the fate of this prisoner, and asked the Rapporteurs of the Monitoring Committee to try and find out his whereabouts. In fact, the President pardoned him on 7 March 1997.

8 The letter is reproduced as Appendix III.

9 As was the case with one of the death-row inmates I met, who did not want to appeal for pardon for a crime he claimed he had not committed.

10 Possibly by Colonel Bekh, the First Deputy Chief of the region’s pre-trial detention system.

11 It should be noted that any execution haven taken place after the signature of Protocol No. 6 to the European Convention on Human Rights (on 5 May 1997) would be particularly serious, since it would also constitute a violation of a treaty obligation under the Vienna treaties (which Ukraine is party to), not to undertake any action which would defeat the object and the purpose of a signed treaty.

12 My underlinings.