Abstract
The present case commentary is focused on cases concerning the so-called Maidan events of 2013-2014. The commentary suggests that the cases at issue underline existence of the long-standing systemic and structural problems within the domestic legal system of Ukraine, which need to be resolved, notably in order to harmonise the legislative and institutional framework of protection of human rights with the requirements of the European human rights law, which incorporates both the European Convention of Human Rights and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The cases touch upon a number of previously deficient legislative provisions and institutional practices. However, most importantly they underline the need to adopt legislation to regulate and ensure protection of freedom of association. Such demand is clearly ensuing from the case-law of the Court and its findings in specific cases as to the lack of coherent legislative framework for this right. The extensive Council of Europe expertise in the area covered by the judgments is surely of reference to the implementation measures – the CPT standards, Venice Commission recommendations, other elements, as well as the findings of the International Advisory Panel are all of relevance. Change is needed urgently as the problems identified in the judgments of the Court clearly fall within the rule of law and justice cooperation aspects of interaction not only with the Council of Europe, but also with the European Union, under the Association Agreement with Ukraine.