Virtually overnight, Russian laws in their entirety were extended to Crimea, including those limiting the exercise of the right to freedom of expression, association and assembly, heralding a rapid deterioration in the respect for human rights in the peninsula and a clampdown on dissent, targeting particularly those opposed to Russian annexation and suspected of harbouring pro-Ukrainian views, says Amnesty International report "Violations of the rights to freedom of expression, assembly and association in Crimea".

The attitude of the de facto Crimean authorities, and their Russian masters, to their opponents is simple: leave or shut up. Many vocal critics have indeed left, spurred also by a spate of abductions in the first few months after the annexation. Several pro-Ukrainian associations and human rights groups have likewise relocated or ceased to operate altogether. The 200,000 strong Crimean Tatar community3 has been particularly affected. Many of the rights violations documented in this briefing have been suffered by Tatars.

This is not surprising, as prominent Tartar leaders remain the most visible and vocal opponents of Russian rule left in the region. Their distinct way of life, culture, religion, language, names and even appearance further set them apart from the majority of Crimea’s residents. Unlike many ethnic Ukrainian activists who have since relocated to mainland Ukraine, Crimean Tatars for the most part regard Crimea as their only homeland and are unwilling to contemplate relocating. However, the human rights violations over the past year are not limited to Crimean Tatars.

ABDUCTIONS AND IMPUNITY

In the first few months of the Russian occupation of Crimea, at least a dozen people were abducted and ill-treated by unidentified paramilitaries (generally referred to as “Crimean selfdefense forces”);4 the fate of seven of them has not been resolved and not a single perpetrator has been identified. Some pro-Ukrainian activists – most famously the film director Oleg Sentsov5 – were arrested by the Russian Federal Security Service and unlawfully transferred to Russia as criminal suspects on highly questionable charges of forming a terrorist group and planning acts of terrorism.

There have also been several cases of abduction of Crimean Tatars by paramilitaries over the past year. Typically, Crimean Tatar men were stopped in the street, pushed into a vehicle, and driven away by an organized group of armed men. The de facto authorities have created a special contact group to investigate these abductions and have promised repeatedly to do the utmost to find those responsible, but as of the time of writing not a single case has been solved.

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION: MUZZLING THE MEDIA

Freedom of expression has been severely restricted in Crimea since the occupation and annexation of the peninsula by Russia in February and March 2014. This has followed, in part, from the application of generally restrictive Russian laws and practices, but has clearly been aggravated by the desire of the de facto authorities in Crimea to silence pro-Ukrainian and other dissenting voices.

Senior members of the de facto authorities have repeatedly made threatening statements warning about imminent sanctions against those who would seek to disseminate views and media coverage which they deem unwelcome. Law enforcement agencies have been deployed to harass people holding, or likely holding, such views, particularly from among members of the Crimean Tatar community. Means of harassment include issuing official “warnings” and conducting home and office searches, and questioning people known for their pro-Ukrainian views.

FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY

Authorities have an obligation to respect, protect and fulfil the right to peaceful assembly, that is, to ensure that neither their own agents nor others abuse these rights, and that no restrictions are imposed on peaceful assemblies other than those which are demonstrably necessary and proportionate for a legitimate purpose permitted under international law.

The right to freedom of peaceful assembly has been severely curtailed since the peninsula’s annexation by the Russia. Public gatherings and street protests in Crimea have visibly decreased since March 2014, as the de facto authorities have employed restrictive Russian legislation and administrative technicalities to curb any public protest or other assemblies that could be seen as opposing the new regime. Under Russian law, organizers of public assemblies are obliged to obtain official authorization unless they plan to hold them in a specially designated, and typically remote, location. These provisions have been used to repeatedly ban unwelcome demonstrations and public gatherings. Other events have been disrupted by young men shouting insults at participants.

Crimean Tatars have borne the brunt of these newly imposed restrictions. They have been forced to move their traditional commemorative events from central squares to remote neighbourhoods, and in some cases have been denied the opportunity to assemble altogether. But they are not the only group to have endured violations of their right to peaceful assembly.

THE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION

As with the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, the right to freedom of association in Crimea has been severely squeezed since the peninsula’s annexation by Russia. A number of prominent NGOs have ceased to exist, particularly those involved in human rights work or EuroMaydan-related activism. The Mejlis has been denied the de facto recognition that it enjoyed by the Ukrainian authorities in Kyiv. Prominent members of the Mejlis have been subjected to harassment and persecution. Parishes belonging to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Kyiv Patriarchate have been under pressure to switch their allegiance to the Moscow Patriarchate.

All associations in Crimea face difficulties related to the pressure to re-register under Russian law. They are threatened with disestablishment or other reprisals for failing to do so, while only a handful of those who have attempted to register have succeeded. According to the report for the year 2014 by the Crimean Human Rights Commissioner (Ombudsperson) Liudmila Lubina, only 396 NGOs – out of more than 10,000 registered in 2013 – reregistered during the whole of 2014 under Russian law. It is unclear how many of these were human rights NGOs, but as of October 2014, only three NGOs which the Commissioner described as human rights organizations were re-registered.

Read full report at the Amnesty International Ukraine Website