CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 7 juillet 2025

.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 } Published on 28 July 2025   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 14591/16 Khayser Mustafa Oglu DZHEMILOV against Russia lodged on 2 March 2016 communicated on 7 July 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application arises from the conflict between Ukraine and the Russian Federation following the latter’s assertion of jurisdiction over Crimea in 2014. The applicant is the son of a prominent Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar politician, the former leader of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People, and has been a member of the Ukrainian Parliament since 1998. He was detained by Ukrainian authorities before the Russian Federation asserted its jurisdiction over Crimea. On 15 April 2015 the Dniprovskyy District Court in Kyiv found the applicant guilty of negligent homicide committed in 2013 in Crimea and sentenced him to three years and eight months’ imprisonment. The applicant was initially detained in Simferopol SIZO in 2013. In October 2014, he was transferred by the Russian authorities from Crimea to Krasnodar Krai in Russia for his trial under Russian law. Ukraine formally requested the applicant’s extradition from Russia, but the request was refused - allegedly as a means of exerting pressure on the applicant’s father. Instead, on 10 June 2015, the applicant was convicted by the Krasnodar Regional Court in Russia for the same offences, namely negligent homicide and illegal possession of a firearm. This conviction was upheld by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on 2 September 2015, and he was sentenced to three years and six months’ imprisonment. The applicant alleges violations of Article 7 and Article 4 of Protocol No.   7 to the Convention, claiming that, as a result of the retroactive application of Russian law in Crimea, he was convicted in Russia for the same offences for which he had already been convicted in Ukraine. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant complied with the admissibility requirements set forth in Article 35 of the Convention?   2.     Was the applicant’s conviction compatible with the requirements of Article 7 of the Convention (see Ukraine v. Russia (re Crimea) [GC], nos.   20958/14 and 38334/18, §§ 1274-78, 25 June 2024)?   3.     Has the applicant been convicted twice for the same offence, as prohibited by Article   4 §   1 of Protocol No.   7 to the Convention (see, for general principles, A and B v. Norway [GC], nos. 24130/11 and 29758/11, §§   105-34, 15 November 2016)?