The European Court of Human Rights on Thursday rejected as “inadmissible” complaints brought by the imprisoned former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili against Ukraine on alleged mistreatment and politically motivated decisions against him dating back to 2017 and 2018.
Saakashvili had alleged violations of his rights in 2017, when his Ukrainian citizenship was revoked, and in 2018, following the institution of criminal proceedings against him, his subsequent arrest and expulsion from the country.
The former official brought various specific complaints under the European Human Rights Convention, including alleged ill-treatment during his arrests and expulsion from Ukraine, alleged unlawfulness of his deprivations of liberty, and public statements made by the Prosecutor General in early December 2017 regarding his alleged criminal activities.
They also include the revocation of his Ukrainian citizenship and alleged unlawfulness of a search conducted in his home for criminal proceedings against him, not being able to continue his political activities in the country after being deprived of the citizenship, alleged lack of effective domestic remedies in respect of his complaints and the decision to divest him of the nationality, which he alleged was politically motivated.
Saakashvili’s Ukrainian nationality was restored to him in May 2019 by the then-newly elected President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. He subsequently returned to Ukraine and was appointed to a high-ranking political post before returning to Georgia in October 2021 where he was detained.
The ECHR noted that after May 2019, when Saakashvili’s Ukrainian citizenship was restored and he resumed his political activities, he could have followed through with his complaints in the domestic courts system of Ukraine.
Indeed, after his return the investigating authorities had made public some preliminary findings in respect of the alleged violations of his rights in 2017-18”, the Court’s statement said.
But the Court added Saakashvili had not provided it with any update on his situation since March 2018, with the lack of updates leading the Court to consider that he had not complied with the obligation under the European Convention to first use all the remedies available at national level before bringing his case to the ECHR, leading to his complaints being rejected on the grounds.