Published on 27 October 2025
FIFTH SECTION
Application no. 46797/19
Galyna Ivanivna DIDYCH and Andriy Sergiyovych DIDYCH
against Ukraine
lodged on 30 July 2019
communicated on 6 October 2025
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The applicants are a wife and a son of Mr S. Didych who participated in a 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).
On 18 February 2014 Mr S. Didych was beaten by the police during a dispersal of protesters, as a result of which he sustained injuries, including a head wound. While trying to escape from the police, Mr S. Didych was run over by a car driven by certain B., unrelated to the police, and died instantly at the scene due to the injuries sustained. As of February 2025, official investigations into Mr S. Didych’s beating by the police and his death were still ongoing.
The applicants complain about a violation of Articles 2, 3, 10 and 11 of the Convention on account of Mr S. Didych’s ill-treatment, injuries and death. Relying on Article 13 of the Convention, the applicants complain that there are no effective remedies for those complaints at the domestic level.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Were the authorities responsible for Mr S. Didych’s death? If so, has his right to life, ensured by Article 2 of the Convention, been violated in the present case?
2. Was he subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, having regard to the allegations that he was ill-treated and injured by the police on 18 February 2014 (see Shmorgunov and Others v. Ukraine, nos. 15367/14 and 13 others, §§ 359-63, 21 January 2021)?
3. Have the domestic authorities conducted an effective official investigation into Mr S. Didych’s alleged ill-treatment and death, as required by Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention (see Shmorgunov and Others, cited above, §§ 327‑35, and Lutsenko and Verbytskyy v. Ukraine, nos. 12482/14 and 39800/14, §§ 58-74, 21 January 2021)?
4. Has there been an interference with Mr S. Didych’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 on 18 February 2014 (see Shmorgunov and Others, cited above, §§ 482-94)?
5. Has there been an effective domestic remedy available for the above complaints under Articles 2, 3, 10 and 11, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?