CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 23 juin 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 15 July 2025   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 1879/20 Roman Sergiyovych SKALSKYY against Ukraine lodged on 16 December 2019 communicated on 23 June 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the investigation into the applicant’s ill ‑ treatment inflicted by private individuals in a village street near his house. On 28 September 2015 at around 10 p.m. four individuals, G.K., P.S., P.V. and G.D., allegedly being in a state of intoxication, had a short verbal altercation with the applicant and his neighbour, following which they punched and kicked the applicant all over his body and, when he fell to the ground, they continued kicking him, aiming to hit his head. The applicant attempted to escape, but he was caught by his hood and dragged over the ground. The applicant then received numerous kicks on his head and face, following which G.K. jumped on his head with both feet. On the same day the applicant was taken to a hospital, where he was operated and received a medical treatment for eighteen days. On 29 September 2015 a criminal case was opened into infliction of minor bodily injuries. On 20 October 2015 an investigator ordered a forensic medical examination of the applicant’s injuries. On 18 January 2016 a forensic medical report established that the applicant had received minor, medium and grave injuries, including a skull fracture (a grave injury), a fracture of articular bones of the lower jaw from the both sides, a fracture of the front and lateral part of the right maxillary sinus and the upper part of the left maxillary sinus (medium injuries), a concussion, a fracture of nasal bones, a haemorrhage of the left eye and the right ear, a wound on the lower lip and numerous bruises and haemorrhages on his face and head (minor injuries). On 19 February 2016 P.S. and P.V. were charged with infliction of minor bodily injuries. On 21 and 22 February 2016 respectively, G.D. and G.K. were charged with infliction of medium and grave bodily injuries. The criminal case against G.K. was examined separately from that against P.S., P.V. and G.D. On 18 December 2017 the Vinnytsya District Court of the Vinnytsya Region (“the Vinnytsya Court”) severed the criminal case of P.V. into separate proceedings, as he was evading justice and was put on a wanted list. The criminal case against P.V. is still ongoing. On 22 December 2017 the Vinnytsya Court convicted G.K. of infliction of grave bodily injuries on the applicant and sentenced him to five years’ imprisonment, but, at the same time, released him from serving the sentence under the Amnesty Act. The court also partly granted the applicant’s civil claim against G.K. On 2 May 2019 the Vinnytsya Court of Appeal and on 18   June 2019 the Supreme Court upheld the first instance judgment. On 18 May 2021 the Vinnytsya Court closed the criminal case against P.S. and G.D. due to the expiry of five-year statutory limitation period for prosecution and, therefore rejected the applicant’s civil claim against them. On 2 August 2021 the Vinnytsya Court of Appeal and on 13 October 2021 the Supreme Court upheld the first instance decision. The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention that the State failed to abide by its positive obligation to ensure efficient and effective investigation into his ill-treatment and bring his perpetrators to account. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Do the facts of the case disclose a violation of Article   3 of the Convention? In particular, having regard to the fact that G.K. was exempted from serving his sentence under the Amnesty Act and that the criminal case against P.S. and G.D. was closed due to the expiry of the five-year statutory limitation period, did the authorities discharge their obligation to conduct an effective investigation into the applicant’s ill-treatment and to bring the perpetrators to account (see Aleksandr Nikonenko v. Ukraine , no. 54755/08, §§ 43-44, 14   November 2013; Pulfer v. Albania , no. 31959/13, § 83, 20   November 2018; and E.G. v. the Republic of Moldova , no. 37882/13, § 43, 13   April 2021)?