Published on 6 October 2025
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 14498/25
Svitlana Leonidivna BLAGODYETYELYEVA-VOVK
against Ukraine
lodged on 29 April 2025
communicated on 16 September 2025
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns allegations about lack of an effective investigation into the threats made against the applicant, an active public figure, by unknown private individuals. The applicant referred to Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention. The applicant also invoked Article 14 in conjunction with Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention, arguing that the domestic authorities had failed to protect her against gender-based cyberviolence. In particular, she claimed that the authorities had failed to adopt an effective legal framework to provide adequate protection.
The applicant is a coordinator of an anti-plagiarism initiative that has exposed cases of academic dishonesty in works of many high-ranking officials. Following the exposure of plagiarism in June 2020 involving an individual who was subsequently appointed head of one of the ministries, the applicant began to receive threats of sexual violence and was harassed by unknown individuals. These threats included electronic and regular letters with a detailed description of the sexual and obscene acts that these unknown individuals planned to take against her. Some of them contained photos of the applicant taken without her knowledge.
On 13 September 2020 the applicant initiated criminal proceedings for the violation of her privacy and one month later she was officially recognised as a victim. In early 2021 the proceedings were requalified as threats against a person performing a civic duty. Despite receiving instructions to perform particular actions and to accelerate the criminal investigation due to public interest in the case, no suspects were identified and on 29 March 2024 the proceedings were terminated. This decision was later overturned. The investigation is currently ongoing.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Did the treatment the applicant was subjected to reach the threshold of Article 3 of the Convention? If so, having regard to the procedural protection from ill-treatment, even when inflicted by private persons (see Beganović v. Croatia, no. 46423/06, § 71, 25 June 2009), was the investigation in the present case adequate for the purposes of Article 3 of the Convention?
2. Have the State authorities complied with their positive obligations under Article 8 of the Convention concerning the threats against the applicant (see Beizaras and Levickas v. Lithuania, no. 41288/15, §§ 106-30, 149-56, 14 January 2020 and Nepomnyashchiy and Others v. Russia, nos. 39954/09 and 3465/17, §§ 76-79 and 84-85, 30 May 2023)?
3. Did the applicant suffer discrimination on the ground of her gender, contrary to Article 14 read in conjunction with Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention, in relation to the relevant domestic authorities’ reaction to her complaints about threats of sexual violence?