CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 janvier 2026

.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 } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } Published on 2 February 2026   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 60213/21 Mykhaylo Yuriyovych REVA against Ukraine lodged on 6 December 2021 communicated on 13 January 2026 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant complains that he was beaten by the police on 11 December 2013 and that no effective official investigation was conducted into that incident. Allegedly, he was beaten in connection with his participation in the series of protests in Ukraine between 21 November 2013 and 21   February 2014, commonly referred to as “Euromaidan” and/or “Maidan” (see Shmorgunov and Others v. Ukraine , nos. 15367/14 and 13 others, §§ 9-17, 21   January 2021) and sustained multiple haematomas. As of September 2025, criminal proceedings into the applicant’s beating, within which he filed civil claims on 18 July 2016 and 2 October 2019, were still ongoing. The applicant complains about a violation of Articles 3, 6, 10 and 11 of the Convention on account of his beating, lack of effective official investigation, excessive length of judicial examination of his civil claims, violation of his rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Relying on Article 13 of the Convention, the applicant complains that there are no effective remedies for these complaints at the domestic level.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Was the applicant subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, having regard to his allegations that he was ill-treated by the police on 11 December 2013 (see Shmorgunov and Others v. Ukraine , nos. 15367/14 and 13 others, §§   359 ‑ 74, 21 January 2021)?   2.     Have the domestic authorities conducted an effective official investigation into the above complaint, as required by Article 3 of the Convention (see Shmorgunov and Others , cited above, §§ 327-58)?   3.     Has the length of the compensation proceedings in the applicant’s case been in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see Karnaushenko v. Ukraine , no. 23853/02, §§ 47-62, 30   November 2006)?   4.     Was an interference with the applicant’s rights to freedom of expression and freedom of peaceful assembly contrary to Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention, on account of his alleged ill-treatment by the police (see Shmorgunov and Others , cited above, §§ 490-521)?   5.     Have there been effective domestic remedies available for the above complaints under Articles 3, 6 § 1, 10 and 11 as required by Article 13 of the Convention?