Background

Human Rights Violations and the Armed Conflict in Chechnya

The 115 European Court judgments thus far decided on Chechnya concern enforced disappearances, killings, and torture that took place from 1999-2004. Russia launched what it called a counterterrorism operation in Chechnya in September 1999. Five months of indiscriminate bombing and shelling in 1999 and 2000 caused thousands of civilian deaths. Throughout the conflict, Chechen rebel forces also committed grave crimes, including numerous brutal attacks targeting civilians in and outside of Chechnya. By March 2000, Russia’s federal forces had gained control over most of Chechnya and continued fighting the insurgency. Their strategy included tactics that constituted serious human rights violations.  Russian forces arbitrarily detained suspected rebel fighters and collaborators and tortured them to secure confessions or testimony. In some cases the corpses of detainees, who had last been seen alive in custody, were subsequently found. More often, those detained were never seen again—they had been forcibly “disappeared.” In only a handful of cases were Russian forces held accountable for crimes. 

Responsibility for law enforcement and counterterrorism operations in Chechnya has been transferred to local forces loyal to Moscow under the de facto command of Chechen President Ramzan Kadyrov. Serious human rights abuses persist, including executions, unacknowledged detention, torture and, although fewer in number, enforced disappearances.[12] Kadyrov and his forces have also been implicated in punitive house burnings of people believed to be linked to rebel fighters[13] and to the brazen murder of Natalia Estemirova, a leading human rights activist and researcher in Chechnya for the Russian human rights organization Memorial. Estemirova was abducted by unidentified men on July 15, 2009; several hours later her body was found with multiple gunshot wounds.[14] Less than a month later, Zarema Sadulayeva and her husband, activists with a local humanitarian organization, were abducted by men claiming to be from security services and later found shot.[15] Kadyrov’s forces have been implicated in these murders.

These violations are not restricted to Chechnya, but are becoming increasingly common in other parts of the North Caucasus. Human Rights Watch has documented executions, arbitrary detentions, and torture during counterterrorism operations in Ingushetia.[16] In August 2009 a prominent newspaper editor known for his criticism of local authorities’ conduct of counterterrorism operations, was shot and killed in Dagestan. A few weeks later, an organization documenting human rights abuses in Dagestan lost nearly all of its computer and paper files in an arson attack that followed numerous threats, including from local security officers, against the organizations staff.[17]

The Role of the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers in the Implementation of Judgments

The Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the judgments decided by the European Court. All states party to the European Convention on Human Rights are obligated to implement judgments decided by the court.[18]

Once a judgment becomes final, the Committee of Ministers requests the state in question to pay the amounts awarded by the court and, when appropriate, to inform the committee of the individual and general measures taken to implement the judgment. Once the Committee of Ministers concludes that the state has taken all the necessary measures to implement the judgment, it adopts a resolution to this effect. Until a state has implemented the judgment, however, the case remains on the committee’s agenda. If a state fails to implement a judgment, the Committee of Ministers can adopt an interim resolution noting the failure to comply with the Convention.[19]

Since the first judgments in 2005, dozens of cases from Chechnya have come under the supervision of the Committee of Ministers of the European Court. Throughout this time Russia has been corresponding with the Committee of Ministers regarding its steps to implement both individual measures in each case and general measures to prevent similar violations from occurring. While it is not within the scope of this report to analyze Russia’s steps to implement general measures, one in particular—its creation of a special unit in the Prosecutor General’s office—is discussed below because it is germane to the issues examined in this report. 

The Role of the Prosecutor’s Office in the Implementation of European Court Judgments

The European Court’s rulings on Chechnya consistently have held that the authorities responsible for investigating human rights violations are insufficiently independent. Beginning in 2006, the Committee of Ministers noted the independence of investigative authorities as an issue of concern for Russia’s implementation of European Court rulings on Chechnya.[20]

In September 2007, a Russian presidential decree formed an Investigative Committee within the Prosecutor General’s office, which separated this agency’s authority to launch and investigate criminal cases from oversight of investigations and prosecutorial functions.[21]

The Investigative Committee has the power to initiate criminal cases, directs investigations, and has supervisory authority over European Court cases. It is subdivided into two branches: the Investigative Directorate [Sledstvennoe upravlenie]and the Military Investigative Directorate [Voennoe sledstvenoe upravlenie]; these branches are further subdivided by federal subjects and then by regions or cities.

After arriving at the Prosecutor General’s office in Moscow, cases which have been decided by the European Court but require further investigation are forwarded to the relevant investigative directorates of regional prosecutors’ offices for further investigation. In Chechnya, the Second Department for Particularly Important Crimes of the Investigative Committee of the Chechnya Prosecutor’s Office (also known as the Second Department) is responsible for the investigations into cases which are the subject of judgments by the European Court.

As indicated in this report, although the Investigative Committee has been functioning for nearly two years and has direct supervision over investigations in European Court cases, including those from Chechnya, investigations into violations in cases from Chechnya found by the European Court have so far been no more fruitful or led to any more meaningful results than prior to the Investigative Committee’s creation.