AYLEY AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA and 1 other application
Doc ref: 25714/16;56328/18 • ECHR ID: 001-192578
Document date: April 3, 2019
- Inbound citations: 1
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 1
Communicated on 3 April 2019
THIRD SECTION
Applications nos. 25714/16 and 56328/ 18 Sharlene AYLEY and O thers against Russia and ANGLINE and Others against Russia lodged on 6 May 2016 and 23 November 2018 respectively
STATEMENT OF FACTS
A. The circumstances of the case
1. The most essential facts of the case, as stated by the applicants or as laid down in documents submitted (see appendix II) or referred to by them, may be summarised as follows.
1. The applicants
2. The applicants are relatives of persons who were on Malaysia Airlines commercial flight MH17, destroyed over the territory of Eastern Ukraine on 17 July 2014. All persons on board died.
3. A list of all applicants, their dates of birth and the dates on which they introduced their applications before the Court appears in appendix I . The information in appendix I is based on the paper application forms and the list of applicants submitted by their lawyers in an electronic format. The applicants have declared that they are nationals of Australia, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Israel, Malaysia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the Philippines, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and Vietnam.
4. Some of the applicants have indicated, in their applications forms or documents submitted by them, the name of their relative who died on flight MH17 and the relevant level of kinship.
5. The applicants in application no. 25714/16 are represented by Mr J. Skinner. The applicants in application no. 56328/18 are represented by Mr S.V. Mewa.
2. The general situation in Eastern Ukraine in July 2014
6. In the beginning of 2014 Russian military forces made several incursions into Ukrainian territory. An incursion in the Crimea region, initially denied but later acknowledged by the Russian authorities, was followed by their declaration that that region had become part of Russia.
7. In the eastern regions of Ukraine, on its border with Russia, protests against the central authorities in Kiyv escalated into an armed separatist insurgency, to which Russia supplied military aid, including military equipment and personnel. In June and July 2014 parts of eastern Ukraine were under the control of self-proclaimed pro-Russian separatist entities. According to the applicants, these entities were either under the control of the authorities of the Russian Federation or operated in very close cooperation with them.
8. In July 2014 there was intensive fighting between the Ukrainian army and separatist forces.
3. The downing of flight MH17 and the first international reactions
9. Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur took off on 17 July 2014 on schedule and was carried out by a passenger Boeing 777-200 aircraft with registration marks 9M-MRD. There were 283 passengers and 15 crew members on board.
10. At 15:20 Central European Time, the aircraft, when flying over eastern Ukraine, was hit and disintegrated in the air. The wreckage fell down on several sites near the villages of Hrabove, Rozsypne and Petropavlivka in Eastern Ukraine. Six wreckage sites were identified, spread over 50 square kilometres overall.
11. All 298 persons on board lost their lives. Their remains were later flown to the Netherlands and identified there by an international team of forensic specialists.
12. On the same day, 17 July 2014, the Trilateral Contact Group of senior representatives of Ukraine, the Russian Federation and the OSCE, formed earlier that year in relation to the armed conflict in the region, issued a press release which stated:
“In view of the terrible crash of a Malaysian airliner in the region of Donetsk and in order to agree on a number of urgent practical measures, the Group held a video conference with representatives of separatist groups in Donetsk.
The representatives of separatist groups in Donetsk committed to the following:
1. as a matter of priority, they shall close off the site of the catastrophe and allow local authorities to start preparations for the recovery of bodies;
2. they shall provide safe access and security guarantees to the national investigation commission, including international investigators, in the area under their control;
3. they shall provide safe access and security guarantees to OSCE monitors;
4. they shall cooperate with the relevant authorities of Ukraine on all practical questions arising in the course of the recovery and investigation works.”
13. On 21 July 2014 the United Nations Security Council adopted unanimously Resolution 2166 which, in its operative part, stated, inter alia :
“[The Security Council] ...
3. Supports efforts to establish a full, thorough and independent international investigation into the incident in accordance with international civil aviation guidelines;
4. Recognizes the efforts under way by Ukraine, working in coordination with ICAO and other international experts and organizations, including representatives of States of Occurrence, Registry, Operator, Design and Manufacture, as well as States who have lost nationals on MH17, to institute an international investigation of the incident, and calls on all States to provide any requested assistance to civil and criminal investigations related to this incident;
5. Expresses grave concern at reports of insufficient and limited access to the crash site;
6. Demands that the armed groups in control of the crash site and the surrounding area refrain from any actions that may compromise the integrity of the crash site, including by refraining from destroying, moving, or disturbing wreckage, equipment, debris, personal belongings, or remains, and immediately provide safe, secure, full and unrestricted access to the site and surrounding area for the appropriate investigation authorities, the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission and representatives of other relevant international organisations according to ICAO and other established procedures;
...
9. Calls on all States and actors in the region to cooperate fully in relation to the international investigation of the incident, including with respect to immediate and unrestricted access to the crash site as referred to in paragraph 6;
10. Welcomes in this regard the statement on 17 July 2014 by the Trilateral Contact Group of senior representatives of Ukraine, the Russian Federation and the OSCE and demands that the commitments outlined in that statement be implemented in full;
11. Demands , that all those responsible for the incident be held to account and that all States cooperate fully with efforts to establish accountability;
...”
4. Investigations , official positions expressed by Governments and other proceedings
(a) The investigation that resulted in the final report of the Dutch Safety Board, published in October 2015
( i) Organisation and handling of the investigation
14. On an unspecified date the Ukrainian authorities opened an investigation into the accident and, soon thereafter, requested the Netherlands, the State with the largest number of nationals on board the aeroplane, to take over. With the agreement of the Dutch authorities, on 23 July 2014 Ukraine delegated the investigation to the Netherlands. As from that date, the Netherlands became the State conducting the investigation into the causes of the crash in accordance with the provisions of Annex 13 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation (hereinafter “the Chicago Convention”).
15. The Dutch Safety Board, an independent administrative body in the Netherlands which operates independently from the Dutch Government, conducted the investigation.
16. It combined the investigation delegated from the Ukrainian authorities with its own investigation, initiated separately on 18 July 2014, into the decision-making related to flying over the conflict zone in the eastern part of Ukraine.
17. In accordance with Annex 13 to the Chicago Convention, the purpose of the investigation was “to establish the causes of the crash and the factors that contributed” with a prevention objective and “not to apportion blame or liability”.
18. While the investigation was conducted by the Dutch Safety Board, the following States participated and appointed accredited representatives: Ukraine, as the State of occurrence, Malaysia, as the State of the operator and of registry, the United States of America, as the State of design and manufacture of the aeroplane, the United Kingdom, as the State of design and manufacture of the engines, as well as Australia and the Russian Federation, as States that provided information on request. Other countries which lost citizens on flight MH 17 were invited to view evidence and comment on the draft report.
19. Air accident investigators from Ukraine and Malaysia, police officers from Australia and journalists, escorted by representatives of the OSCE, visited the crash area in the days following the crash. The wreckage was photographed extensively and showed the locations mostly undisturbed. The information gathered was shared with the Dutch Safety Board.
20. Investigators acting for the international investigation led by the Dutch Safety Board visited the crash site for the first time in November 2014, there having been no earlier possibility due to safety concerns related to the armed conflict in the area. They recovered the majority of the wreckage. Additional visits, during which more wreckage parts were recovered, took place in March and April/May 2015. The investigators recorded the locations where each piece of wreckage was found. Some wreckage pieces were collected by local residents and handed over to the Dutch Safety Board with the consequence that the location where they fell was unknown. Other pieces found on the ground had obviously been moved before they were found. Part of the wreckage was never recovered, including pieces that were identified as having been in the wreckage area shortly after the crash but were not found during the recovery missions.
21. During the recovery of the wreckage, a number of parts that did not originate from the plane were found in the wreckage area. The parts that were suspected to be related to a surface-to-air missile were transported to the Netherlands in the same way as the aeroplane wreckage.
22. A wreckage reconstruction, an analysis of the high-energy objects found and blast damage simulations were also performed, among others, during the investigation.
23. Following a preliminary report published on 9 September 2014, the Board published its final report in October 2015.
24. The latter report stated that there had been “constructive cooperation between the States involved in the investigation: the Netherlands, Ukraine, Malaysia, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and the Russian Federation” and that “the representatives of these States, who were members of the international investigation team, had access to the investigation information and were able to study and verify it.”
( ii) The final report of October 2015
25. The most relevant findings in the report are listed below:
- the aircraft had been in an airworthy condition on departure from Amsterdam;
- at the relevant time both Ukraine and the Russian Federation had restricted access to parts of their airspace up to flight level 320 (meaning up to an altitude of approximately 9,750 metres);
- while over Ukraine, including at the time of the last contact, the aircraft was flying at flight level 330 (at an altitude of approximately 10,050 metres);
- no distress messages from flight MH17 were received by air traffic control;
- the replay of the communications recorded on the cockpit voice recorder demonstrated no indication of anything unusual and the recording ended abruptly, twenty milliseconds after two sound peaks heard on the tape;
- the data from the flight data recorder demonstrated that the aircraft was flying at 33,000 feet (approximately 10,050 metres) with a groundspeed of approximately 914 km per hour, that no technical malfunction or warnings were recorded and that the recording stopped abruptly;
- there was no in-flight fire before the break-up of the aeroplane; fires erupted at two wreckage sites after the crash;
- three other commercial aeroplanes were in the same area at the time of the last contact, the closest of them being at a distance of 33 km; radar data from Ukraine did not show any other radar targets in the vicinity;
- a video of the radar screen received from the Russian Federation showed, during two intervals of 20 and 40 seconds, a second radar target close to the target labelled MH17; this was considered to be aeroplane debris having sufficient reflection to be detected as primary target, a finding consistent with the wind direction and final position of the wreckage; it was not possible to verify the video as the Russian Federation, despite requests, did not send raw radar data to the investigators but only a video of the radar screen;
- due to factors such as detection sensitivity levels of the radars and their system filtering modalities (intended to remove phenomena from a radar screen that are detected but are not required to be displayed), it was very unlikely that the air traffic control primary radar systems in the area could detect and display a missile moving at high speed;
- wreckage parts from what appeared to have been a 9M38 series surface-to-air missile were found in the area;
- the autopsies demonstrated that the captain, the first officer from team A and the purser sustained multiple fatal injuries associated with the impact of metal fragments moving at high velocity;
- over 500 small fragments were recovered from bodies and the aeroplane wreckage; the composition, shape and other characteristics of many of these fragments showed that they were high-energy objects that had deformed on impact with the aeroplane at very high velocity; some of the fragments were in the shape of a bow-tie;
- some of the aeroplane wreckage parts and one of the missile parts showed traces of explosive residues;
- paint samples taken from missile parts found in the wreckage area matched those found on foreign objects extracted from the aeroplane;
- the investigation considered in detail and excluded the following possible causes of the damage and break-up of the aeroplane: lightning, meteor strike, space debris, explosion inside the aircraft or in the tank or engines;
- the evidence pointed to damage by a large number of high-energy objects, well over 800, that perforated the aeroplane from the outside, on the left hand and upper side of the cockpit; there was also evidence of the effects of a detonation blast, such as blast deposits and direct pressure;
- the investigation considered in detail and excluded, as possible weapon systems that may have caused the damage found on the aeroplane, the following weapons: air-to-air gun/canon (which could not result in more than several dozen bullets penetrating the aircraft given the altitude and speed of flight MH 17 and could not produce fragments as those found in bodies and wreckage); air-to-air missile (damage pattern not matching and no air-to-air missiles used in the region having the distinctly formed bow-tie shaped fragments in their warhead); portable shoulder-launched surface-to-air missile (unable to reach the altitude MH17 was flying at).
- there was only one source of damage and the aeroplane was not struck by more than one weapon;
- a large surface-to-air missile with fragmentation warhead was able to engage an aeroplane of the size and speed of a Boeing 777 at its cruising altitude; missile warheads of this type contained fragments of different shapes;
- bow-tie and cube-shaped fragments were only found in the 9N314M warhead, which can be fitted to the 9M38M1 missile;
- the Buk surface-to-air missile system was present in the region and was the only weapon with warheads containing pre-formed fragments in the shape of a bow-tie; this system could reach targets up to an altitude of 80,000 feet (approximately 24,400 metres);
- the analysis of all information in the investigation led to conclude that the aeroplane had been struck by a 9N314M warhead as carried on a 9M38-series missile and launched by a Buk surface-to-air missile system;
- the studies, including simulation exercises, conducted with the aim of verifying that the damage observed could originate from such a warhead and establishing the missile ’ s possible flight path from the ground to detonation resulted in findings that a 70kg warhead best matched the damage observed on the wreckage and that the area from which the possible flight paths could have commenced was an area of about 320 square kilometres in the east of Ukraine.
( iii) Requests for corrections to the draft final report and the replies of the Dutch Safety Board
26. Appendix V to the report lists proposals for corrections to the initial text of the draft final report which were made by representatives of the countries participating in the international investigation on unspecified dates prior to the publication of the final report. The final report took account of the corrections requested when they were granted.
27. The Russian Federation and Ukraine, among others, made a number of proposals. Some of those are listed below.
28. The Russian Federation proposed, inter alia , that the report should state that there “existed other scenarios that could lead to in-flight break-up of the aircraft” but the Dutch Safety Board refused, noting that all other scenarios had beeen considered, analysed and excluded.
29. The Russian Federation also disagreed with the conclusion of the Dutch Safety Board that the Russian Federation had failed to submit raw radar data in violation of Annexes 11 and 14 to the Chicago Convention, maintaining that Annex 14 did not require that raw data must be saved. The Dutch Safety Board consulted the International Civil Aviation Organisation (“ICAO”) which concurred with the Dutch position.
30. Ukraine requested a sentence to be included to the effect that access to the crash site could not be provided immediately because the area was controlled by “illegal armed groups”. This was refused by the Dutch Safety Board as it had to remain politically neutral.
31. The Russian Federation requested information on the steel grade used in the discovered high-energy objects in order to link those to possible types of warhead. The Dutch Safety Board considered that studying the detailed chemical composition of the steel was not relevant because high-energy objects are usually made from low-grade metal (unalloyed steel) originating from different batches, different sources, different manufacturing locations and over different periods, which made it impossible to match the fragments found with reference material from an intact warhead.
32. The Russian Federation proposed to include text that according to satellite pictures from the Russian Ministry of Defence a Ukrainian Buk M1 battery had been identified in the area of Zaroshchenskoye on 17 July 2014. The Dutch Safety Board stated that while this was relevant to the criminal investigation, its report did not deal with the location of weapons system in the area but only with identifying the cause of the crash.
33. The Russian Federation criticised the report for having limited its consideration of air-to-air rockets to those used by Russia and Ukraine and insisted that the damage on MH17 could have resulted from an air-to-air rocket. The Dutch Safety Board replied that there was no evidence of weapons from other parts of the world being in the inventory of any party acting in the region. It also stated that the damage pattern observed on the wreckage could not be reproduced when a 40 kg warhead, typical of an air-to-air weapon, was simulated. The conclusion that the weapon used was not an air-to-air rocket had been duly justified.
(b) The criminal investigation conducted by the Joint Investigation Team (“the JIT”)
34 . On an unspecified date a team of police officers and public prosecutors from Australia, Belgium, Malaysia, the Netherlands and Ukraine, under the coordination of prosecutors from the Netherlands, started a criminal investigation into the downing of flight MH17. Its purpose was to establish the facts, identify those responsible for the crash and collect evidence which could be used in court.
35. This investigation was separate from that conducted by the Dutch Safety Board and ran in parallel. It is still pending.
36. On 28 September 2016, the JIT presented the first results of its criminal investigation. The main conclusion of the JIT was that flight MH17 had been shot down by a BUK missile from the 9M38 series, which had been fired from an agricultural field in the area of Pervomaiskyi. At that time this area had been controlled by pro-Russian separatists. The missile from the 9M38 series had been fired by a BUK TELAR brought in from the territory of the Russian Federation and returned to the Russian Federation after use.
37. In May 2018 the JIT presented additional results. The JIT concluded that the BUK TELAR that shot down flight MH17 had come from a unit of the Russian Federation ’ s armed forces - the 53rd Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade or the 53rd Brigade from Kursk in the Russian Federation. At the presentation of May 2018 the JIT showed a venturi and a casing that had been found in Eastern Ukraine and asked for information about the numbers on these parts and the unit to which the missile (of which the venturi and the casing were part of) was supplied to. It also called for witnesses to come forward.
38. During its investigation, in 2014, 2016, 2017 and 2018, the JIT requested information and legal assistance from the Russian authorities. It appears that the Russian authorities replied for the first time in 2018. In its public statements the JIT affirmed that it had never received a reply to its request specifically related to the numbers found on rocket parts. The JIT also stated that information publicly presented by the Russian Ministry of Defence was factually incorrect on several points, including the alleged presence of a fighter jet near the MH17 on radar images as presented at that Ministry ’ s press conference in July 2014.
(c) Declarations by the Governments of the Netherlands and Australia
39. On the basis of the conclusions reached by the JIT, in May 2018 the Governments of the Netherlands and Australia declared that they considered the Russian Federation responsible for the downing of flight MH17.
(d) Official declarations of Government officials from the Russian Federation.
40. The Government of the Russian Federation have repeatedly denied any responsibility for the downing of flight MH17. They have also confirmed that no investigations are ongoing in Russia into the cause of the downing, that Russia is opposed to a special international tribunal for the MH17 case and that no Russian suspect will be extradited in that connection.
41. In October 2018 the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs made a statement affirming, inter alia , that the Russian authorities fully cooperated with the investigations, welcomed Dutch specialists and prosecutors in Moscow, made secret technical and factory data available to the investigation, transferred the results of a full-scale test, carried out by the producer of BUK missiles and provided raw radar images of the time of the tragedy. The Ministry further affirmed that it had provided irrefutable data and evidence of Ukraine ’ s involvement in the MH17 disaster, including regarding the question who owned the BUK missile concerned. It criticised the Netherlands authorities that they ignored valuable information and worked on a predetermined version of events based on the view that Russia was responsible.
(e) Proceedings before the ICJ
42 . On 16 January 2017 Ukraine instituted proceedings against the Russian Federation in the International Court of Justice (“the ICJ”) with regard to alleged violations of, inter alia , the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism. Ukraine requested the ICJ to establish, inter alia , that the Russian Federation had violated its obligations under that convention by supplying funds, weapons and training to illegal armed groups that engage in acts of terrorism in Ukraine and that the Russian Federation bears international responsibility, by virtue of its sponsorship of terrorism and failure to prevent the financing of terrorism, for the acts of terrorism committed by its proxies in Ukraine, including the shoot-down of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17. These proceedings are pending.
5. Other factual allegations and material submitted by the applicants
43. The applicants submitted, inter alia , numerous reports and publications by expert groups, media outlets, non-governmental organisations and individuals. This material covers topics such as, inter alia , the origins and development of the conflict in Eastern Ukraine, the Russian policies and involvement in this conflict, weapons systems used by belligerents in the region, witness accounts concerning the presence of Russian military personnel in the area, the presence and movement of a BUK missile system from Russia into Ukraine and back to Russia at the relevant period of July 2017, names and possible roles of Russian military personnel and pro-Russian separatists allegedly involved in the handling and firing of the missile that downed flight MH17.
44. On the basis of the material submitted by them, the applicants made, inter alia , the following additional allegations on the facts.
45. By mid-June 2014 the pro-Russian forces in Eastern Ukraine were not progressing well militarily. In early July 2014, separatist commanders, including Igor Strelkov, sent memos to the Russian authorities and to the President of the Russian Federation raising concern over growing risks to Russian interests in the ground war. These risks stemmed to a certain extent from Ukrainian military aircraft attacking separatist positions. In clear connection to these developments, there was movement of heavy armaments across the eastern Russian-Ukrainian border in June 2014.
46. Many Ukrainian military aircraft, including larger ones such as AN30 and IL76, were shot down in Eastern Ukraine during May and June 2014.
47. Between 22 June and 25 July 2014 military units of the armed forces of the Russian Federation conducted training exercises near the eastern Ukrainian border and close to a border crossing known as “the Stripe” and held by pro-Russian separatists.
48. Just before 17 July 2014, Russian media allegedly controlled by the authorities, including NTV and Rossiya 24, broadcast reports of Russian BUK missile convoys on roads in and around the cities of Torez and Snezhnoye in the Donetsk region of Eastern Ukraine.
49. There exists strong evidence, including eyewitnesses, photographs, geolocated photographs, video films, matching vehicle identification numbers and characteristics of the transport vehicle, allegedly demonstrating that a Russian BUK missile system with four missiles from the 53 rd missile brigade of the Russian army moved on 15 and 16 July 2014 into Eastern Ukraine from Russia and, after the attack on MH17 on 17 July, moved back in the direction of the Russian border. The photographic and video material of the trip back to Russia showed that one out of the four BUK missiles was missing.
B. Relevant international law
1. The Convention on International Civil Aviation (the Chicago Convention).
50. The Chicago Convention was signed on 7 December 1944. Almost all members of the United Nations Organisation, including, inter alia , Malaysia, the Netherlands, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, are parties thereto. The Convention has been revised eight times (in 1959, 1963, 1969, 1975, 1980, 1997, 2000 and 2006).
51. The Convention provides for rules related to civil aviation and also for the creation of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (“ICAO”), its powers and governing bodies. ICAO has become a specialized agency of the United Nations Organisation charged with coordinating and regulating international air travel.
52. Articles 1 and 2 provide as follows:
Article 1 Sovereignty
“ The contracting States recognize that every State has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory. ”
Article 2 Territory
“ For the purposes of this Convention the territory of a State shall be deemed to be the land areas and territorial waters adjacent thereto under the sovereignty, suzerainty, protection or mandate of such State.”
53. Article 90 provides for the adoption of annexes to the Chicago Convention by ICAO ’ s Council (which consists of thirty-six contracting States including the States of chief importance in air transport, those making the largest contribution to the provision of facilities for civil air navigation and other States to ensure representation of the major geographical areas). After adoption by the Council, the annexes are communicated to the contracting States and become effective unless a majority of those States disapproves.
54. There are currently nineteen annexes containing standards and recommended practices. Annex 11 concerns air traffic services, including obligations on recording and communicating radar data. Annex 13 concerns the investigation of aircraft accidents and incidents. Annex 14 concerns aerodromes.
2. The Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against The Safety of Civil Aviation (the Montreal Convention).
55. The Montreal Convention of 1971, to which parties are almost all members of the United Nations Organisation, including, inter alia , Malaysia, the Netherlands, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, provides insofar as relevant:
Article 1
“ 1. Any person commits an offence if he unlawfully and intentionally:
... (b) destroys an aircraft in service ...
2. Any person also commits an offence if he:
... (b) is an accomplice of a person who commits or attempts to commit any such offence ... ”
Article 5
“1. Each Contracting State shall take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offences in the following cases:
(a) when the offence is committed in the territory of that State;
(b) when the offence is committed against or on board an aircraft registered in that State; ...
2. Each Contracting State shall likewise take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offences mentioned in Article 1, paragraph 1 (a), (b) and (c), and in Article 1, paragraph 2, in so far as that paragraph relates to those offences, in the case where the alleged offender is present in its territory and it does not extradite him pursuant to Article 8 to any of the States mentioned in paragraph 1 of this Article.
3. This Convention does not exclude any criminal jurisdiction exercised in accordance with national law.”
Article 11
“1. Contracting States shall afford one another the greatest measure of assistance in connection with criminal proceedings brought in respect of the offences. The law of the State requested shall apply in all cases.
...”
COMPLAINTS
56. The applicants in application no. 25714/16 complain under Article 2 of the Convention that the Russian Federation is responsible for the downing of flight MH17 and the death of their relatives on board, either directly or through the acts of Russian separatists under their control.
They further complain under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention that the Russian Federation failed to discharge its obligation to conduct an investigation into the death of their relatives and bring the perpetrators to justice. The Russian Federation also failed to cooperate with the investigations led by the Dutch Safety Board and the Joint investigation team in the Netherlands.
57. The applicants in application no. 56328/18 complain as follows:
( 1) Invoking Article 2 of the Convention, that there has been a substantive violation of that provision in that the Russian Federation was responsible for the downing of flight MH 17 through its army officers or other officials or by virtue of its control over and support for the Russian separatists ’ forces, as well as because it had effective control and exercised some governmental power over the relevant part of the territory of Eastern Ukraine. In particular, it is alleged that, while knowing or being obviously in a position to know that civilian aircraft flew over the relevant area and could be reached by a missile fired from a BUK launching facility, the Russian Federation moved its BUK launch facility to the territory of Ukraine and was responsible for one of the following scenarios: (a) was actively involved in the decision to fire the BUK missile at the airplane; or (b) despite the presence of its military during the firing of the missile did not prevent the firing of the missile; or (c) made the BUK launching facility and missile available to the separatists ’ forces without controlling its use; or (d) did not keep the BUK missile and launch facility under its control;
( 2) Invoking Article 2 of the Convention, that there has been a procedural violation of that provision in that the Russian Federation (i) did not adequately cooperate with the investigation conducted by international fact-finding committees, (ii) provided incorrect information to the JIT and (iii) failed to conduct an independent, adequate, prompt and reliable investigation;
( 3) Invoking Articles 2, 3 and 8 of the Convention that, by failing to cooperate in the international investigations and to conduct an adequate investigation in Russia, as well as by failing to provide information that could clarify who was responsible for the killing of the applicants ’ close relatives, the Russian Federation directly caused the applicants to suffer anguish and a heavy burden, amounting to ill-treatment, and breached their right to respect for their family life;
( 4) Invoking Articles 2, 3, 6, 8 and 13 of the Convention, that the Russian Federation, by failing to cooperate in the international investigations and to conduct an adequate investigation in Russia, deprived the applicants of their right to an effective remedy and compensation.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Can the applicants claim to be the victims of the alleged violations of the Convention? The applicants who have not indicated the name of their relative who died on board of MH17 and the level of kinship should do so.
2. Do the alleged violations of the Convention and its Protocols fall within the “jurisdiction” of the Russian Federation within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention? In particular, did the Russian Federation exercise “authority and/or effective control” over the relevant eastern regions of Ukraine at the time of the downing of flight MH17, through their armed forces or a subordinate local administration or in collaboration with local armed forces? In this respect, what was the extent of the military and logistic Russian presence in July 2014? In addition, were agents of the Russian State involved, directly or indirectly, in the downing of flight MH17?
3. Have the applicants complied with the requirements of Article 35 § 1 of the Convention?
4. Has there been a violation of Article 2 in that the respondent State was allegedly responsible for the death of the applicants ’ close relatives?
5. Having regard to the procedural protection of the right to life (see paragraph 104 of Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, ECHR 2000-VII), has there been a breach of Article 2 of the Convention in relation to the alleged failure of the respondent State to investigate the downing of flight MH17 and their alleged failure to cooperate with the relevant international investigations?
6. Have the applicants been subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention in that the authorities of the respondent State, by allegedly failing to investigate and cooperate with the relevant international investigations, caused them to suffer anguish and distress because of the lack of clarity as to the identity of those responsible for the death of their close relatives? Has there been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention in that regard?
7. Has there been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention in conjunction with its Articles 2, 3 and 8 on account of the alleged lack of effective domestic remedies?
APPENDIX I
Application no. 25714/16
Date of introduction – 6 May 2016
No.
Last Name
First Name
Title English
Date of Birth
1Ayley
Sharlene
Ms
31/01/1981
2Lauschet
Tim
Mr
28/02/1991
3Dyczynski
Jerzy
Mr
06/04/1951
4Dyczynski
Angela
Ms
01/04/1953
5Samsuddin
Salleh
Mr
26/04/1960
6Ibrahim
Sharom Bee Binti Mohamed
Mr
23/11/1956
7Ismail
Mohd Tarmizi Bin
Mr
04/09/1973
8Binti Modh Yusof
Hasnah
Mr
18/08/1943
9Wong
Kin Wah
Mr
18/02/1972
10Chong
Yee Wan
Mr
02/03/1968
11Chong
Seng See
Ms
02/03/1971
12Chong
Shih Yen
Mr
15/09/1964
13Chong
Yoon Loong
Mr
16/07/1969
14Yee
Swee Yeng
Ms
04/09/1942
15Chong
Yuk Sang
Mr
16/10/1941
16Abdullah
Normi Binti
Mr
05/02/1960
17Geok
Tan Bee
Mr
06/09/1970
18Mahdi
Madiani
Ms
06/11/1972
19Malcolm
Andrew
Mr
21/09/1978
20Malcolm
Jane
Ms
15/01/1977
21Gibson
Cassandra
Ms
06/05/1990
22Gibson
Chelsea
Ms
30/04/1993
23Jackson
Craig
Mr
11/03/1962
24Turnbull
Robert
Mr
17/04/1939
25Turnbull
Angela
Ms
19/11/1940
26Sturdee
Cathy-Ann
Ms
28/02/1969
27Sidelik
Hans
Mr
10/03/1955
28Baker
Jeffrey
Mr
16/06/1987
29Baker
Steven
Mr
17/01/1989
30Teoh
Kooi Weng
Mr
12/11/1956
31Yim
Lim Swee
Mr
14/08/1962
32Vern
Evonne Teoh Ee
Ms
28/07/1989
33Teoh Qi En
David
Mr
25/11/1993
Date of introduction – 20 June 2018
No.
Last Name
First Name
Title English
Date of Birth
1Bats
Peter Alexander
Mr
09/11/1973
2Bats van Breda
Jessica Ellen
Ms
09/01/1975
3Borgsteede
Franciscus
Mr
20/01/1939
4Borgsteede-Wiersma
Johanna Everarda
Ms
06/05/1943
5Borgsteede
Ronny Franciscus
Mr
25/02/1970
6van Druten-Borgsteede
Laura Maria
Ms
17/06/1966
7Bras
Eric Jan
Mr
12/09/1964
8Djodikromo
Sadimin
Mr
28/08/1951
9Djodikromo
Warinih Doris
Ms
17/12/1958
10Djodikromo
Nikolev Soenarto
Mr
03/09/1976
11Djodikromo
Valeri Sumantri
Ms
24/08/1984
12Djodikromo
Carol Instanti Sabrina
Ms
12/03/1987
13van Duijn
Gijsbert
Mr
28/01/1943
14van Duijn
Cornelia Quirina
Ms
08/01/1941
15van Duijn
Nicole Karina
Ms
13/12/1971
16Chong
Pirkko Liliane
Ms
09/06/1955
17Burr
Eila Marilyn
Ms
07/05/1956
18de Kadt
Emerentiana Josephina
Ms
01/08/1926
19Kamsma
Eric Jacobus Bernardus
Mr
11/02/1959
20Kamsma
Edwin
Mr
23/01/1963
21Kamsma
Bernardus Jacobus
Mr
11/07/1965
22Keijzer
Freek
Mr
06/06/1961
23Keijzer - Ten Heuvel
Jacqueline
Ms
10/11/1960
24Keijzer
Annebel
Ms
23/01/1991
25Keijzer
Rutger
Mr
23/01/1993
26van Keulen
Arjen
Mr
14/03/1961
27van Keulen
Jennigje Margaretha Andrina Ariëtta
Ms
12/05/1938
28van Doorn
Willy Elisabeth
Ms
01/08/1929
29van Doorn
Elisabeth Veronica
Ms
06/04/1961
30van Noort
Alida Johanna
Ms
17/03/1936
31van Langeveld
Anthony Martin
Mr
09/07/1964
32Bartsen
Ida Petronella
Ms
29/01/1954
33de Leeuw
Arjan Willem
Mr
02/05/1979
34Misran
Robert Rakiman
Mr
02/04/1942
35Misran-Resosemito
Antijem
Ms
30/03/1942
36Misran
Aniane Rosinie
Ms
02/07/1965
37Misran
Annette Soerani
Ms
26/04/1967
38Misran
Armand Rakijo
Mr
15/10/1968
39Misran
Ardi Rakidie
Mr
10/11/1970
40Misran
Astrid Soeratie
Ms
04/06/1974
41van Nielen
Gerardus Cornelis
Mr
12/10/1953
42van Nielen
Wilhelmina Cornelia Maria Lucia Geudens
Ms
04/01/1955
43van Nielen
Martijn Willem Franciscus
Mr
13/09/1987
44Peereboom
Dennie Jan
Mr
26/12/1984
45Pijnenburg
Franciscus Antonius
Mr
17/05/1956
46Marinus
Pim
Mr
19/06/1991
47Raap
Roelof
Mr
03/09/1956
48Raap
Sijbren
Mr
08/04/1963
49van der Sar
Leendert Eliza
Mr
04/04/1950
50van der Sar - Lorier
Cornelia Lena
Ms
20/11/1950
51van der Sar
Daniel
Mr
17/11/1977
52van der Sar
Lieselotte
Ms
20/10/1983
53van den Schoor
Peter Mathij
Mr
28/03/1959
54van den Schoor
Catharina Maria Gerarda
Ms
29/11/1960
55van den Schoor
Rob Henricus Antonius
Mr
05/01/1991
56van der Schoot
Anna Maria Theresia
Ms
18/02/1967
57Specken
Reginald Jacques Wilhelmus Marie
Mr
12/04/1950
58Peusens
Marie-Jeanne Mechtilde Josephine
Ms
10/08/1950
59Specken
Michel An
Ms
22/07/1985
60Slok
Jan
Mr
24/03/1959
61Soeltan
Sharon Fazia
Ms
09/09/1990
62Soeltan
Raoul Alexander
Mr
19/10/1993
63Wagemans
Gustave Gerardus Marie
Mr
27/06/1962
64Dormans-Wagemans
Johanna Maria Josefa
Ms
03/04/1960
65Wagemans
Andreas Gerardus Marie
Mr
28/02/1953
66Wilhelmina
Hubertina Maria Catharina
Ms
24/11/1956
67van der Weide
Robert
Mr
03/05/1931
68de Leeuw
Hendrica Gerarda Nida
Ms
10/04/1938
69van der Weide
Richard
Mr
08/01/1963
70Hijmans
Antonius Lambertus
Mr
11/04/1927
71Dirks e/v Hijmans
Susanna Cornelia Eimerdina
Ms
21/02/1928
72Hijmans
Madelon Antoinette Cornélie
Ms
10/09/1952
73Hijmans
Ellen Jeanine Susanne
Ms
26/10/1953
74Hijmans
Michel Dirk Matthijs
Ms
25/04/1958
75Hijmans
Linda Geraldine Jeannette
Ms
26/09/1959
76Hijmans
Richard Matthijs Anton
Ms
13/10/1961
77Huijbers
Coenraad Jan Willem
Mr
07/03/1955
78Knoop-Huijbers
Janine Femmy
Ms
16/08/1958
79Huijbers
Annemieke Yvonne
Ms
28/11/1983
80Martens
Johannes Peter
Mr
02/08/1946
81Martens
Christiaan Martijn
Mr
02/08/2010
82Willems
Johanna Agatha Wilhelmina
Ms
29/07/1949
83Nieveen
Jan
Mr
03/12/1947
84Nieveen
Lisette
Ms
11/04/1974
85Engelen
Eline
Ms
23/09/1982
86Nieveen
Jannieke Sietske
Ms
06/10/1989
87Nieveen
Ilse Maria
Ms
29/03/1991
88Nguyen
Ngoc Khanh
Mr
20/02/1952
89Quan
Thi Phong
Ms
25/01/1956
90Nguyen
Minh Quang
Mr
20/02/1982
91Pabellon
Lilia Cabile
Mr
19/01/1966
92Pabellon Carale
Erlinda
Ms
05/04/1950
93Pabellon Cabili
Tirso
Ms
23/09/1957
94van der Steen
Akke
Ms
28/01/1972
95van Der Steen
Jacobus Hendrik Wilhelmus Bastiaan
Mr
22/06/1965
96van der Sande
Alida Maria Theodora Wilhelmina
Ms
20/01/1953
97van der Sande
Martinus Raphael Maria
Mr
30/10/1959
98van der Sande
Willibrordus Martinus Maria
Mr
03/06/1956
99Timmers
Dennis Petrus Martinus
Mr
27/12/1982
100Timmers
Jolanda Henrica Johanna
Ms
01/08/1985
101van Grinsven-Timmers
Sandra Johanna Stephani
Ms
11/02/1981
102Smolders
Nicolaas Franciscus Leonardus Arnoldina
Mr
13/01/1968
103Smolders-van Hoof
Anna Maria Arnoldina Catharina
Ms
02/02/1944
104Smolders
Nicolaas Petrus Hubertus
Mr
27/09/1943
105Pfarrer
Hillary Catharine
Ms
15/04/1960
106Meuleman
Henri Willibrord Antonius
Mr
31/05/1959
107Wals
Marieke
Ms
07/08/1964
108van Noord
Anna
Ms
09/04/1941
109Ernst
Wilhelmus Maria
Mr
09/12/1946
110van der Leij
Leopold Theodurus
Mr
29/09/1954
111Kiezebrink
Christiana Lutine
Ms
09/11/1957
112van der Leij
Jessica
Ms
13/03/1979
113Gluckstern
Eliane Antoinette
Ms
29/09/1937
114Hemelrijk
Sylvia
Ms
22/11/1970
115Hemelrijk
Anouschka
Ms
28/09/1995
116de Graaf
Everardus Wilhelmus Theodorus
Mr
10/02/1964
117de Graaf
Hendrina Sophia Theodora
Ms
13/02/1990
118de Graaf
Johannes Pieter Willy
Mr
07/05/1995 (06/05/1995 in app.form)
119de Graaf
Johannus Cornelis Nicolai
Mr
19/04/1988
120Brouwer-Lemaire
Raymonde Anna Leonce
Ms
13/12/1928
121Brouwer
Cécile Hyacintha Christine
Ms
25/11/1970
122Brouwer
Hélène Cornelia Raymonde
Ms
05/12/1962
123Bakker
Frederik Lambertus
Mr
17/06/1951
124Bakker
Jakobus
Mr
19/03/1958
125Bakker
Gert Leo
Mr
17/05/1966
126Vermeulen
Judith Geraldine Maria
Ms
22/01/1963
127Vermeulen-Hopman
Ellen Johanna
Ms
24/08/1927
128Vermeulen
Eleonora Veritas Maria
Ms
20/07/1958
129Schoofs
Rink
Mr
30/03/1990
130Fan
Chi Yeung
Mr
26/04/1984
131Loh
Ean Tin
Ms
20/03/1965
132Loh
Ean Lee
Ms
10/10/1961
133Loh
Kok Hong
Mr
05/06/1969
134Loh
Loo Hwa
Mr
21/06/1976
135Loh
Kok Wah
Ms
30/05/1963
136van Geene
Jan
Mr
02/06/1931
137Schmidt-Golstijn
Henderieka Katriena
Ms
10/04/1940
138de Rycker
Geert Antoon Karel Leopold
Mr
22/01/1954
139Adler
Enrico-Ricardo Alexis
Mr
15/08/1959
140Adler
Feodorowich Larry
Mr
22/03/1956
141Adler
Priscilla Felice
Ms
02/01/1949
142Kraay
Willem Frans
Mr
28/10/1938
143Koch
Kirsten
Ms
02/04/1996
144Koch
Nils
Mr
01/06/1994
145van Eldijk-Kuijpers
Wilhemlina Theodora
Ms
27/09/1933
146van Eldijk
Antonius Johannes Maria
Mr
15/04/1958
147van Eldijk
Johannes Wouter Maria
Mr
02/02/1960
148van Eldijk
Wouter Antonius Wilhelmus
Mr
13/08/1967
149Brouwers
Josephus Johannes
Mr
24/03/1960
150Brouwers-van Golde
Anna Maria Petronella
Ms
02/01/1940
151Wiegel
Gita Tryan Welyanda Putu
Ms
16/12/2000
152de Schutter
Maarten Wim
Mr
02/02/1999
153de Schutter-Gijzen
Jacoba Cornelia Maria
Ms
09/10/1939
154de Schutter
Wilhelmus Johannes Maria
Mr
14/11/1938
155de Schutter
Adriana Elisabeth
Ms
11/10/1969
156van Muijlwijk
Frits Jan
Mr
20/04/1952
157Westhoff
Johanna
Ms
21/05/1953
158van Muijlwijk
Kelvin Lourens Gerardus
Mr
14/04/1997
159van Muijlwijk
Lourens Gerardus
Mr
03/02/1995
160van Muijlwijk
Marjef
Ms
19/09/1977
161Avnon
Dov
Mr
31/07/1957
162Avnon-Boele
Jeanne Jacomijntje
Ms
06/12/1958
163Avnon
Jonathan
Mr
07/01/1984
164Avnon-Sarris
Ruth
Ms
21/09/1986
165van Doorn
Diederick Kristiaan
Mr
24/10/1970
166van Doorn
Menno Ernst
Mr
14/11/1939
167Abeln e/v Van Doorn
Sabine Marie Pauline
Ms
27/08/1943
168Dewa
Shazelina Zaini
Ms
24/05/1972
169van den Hende
Jakobus Gerardus
Mr
17/02/1940
170Wijngaard e/v van den Hende
Wilhelmina Maria
Ms
01/01/1940
171van den Hende
Francisca Maria
Ms
11/04/1968
172van den Hende
Hendrika Elisabeth
Ms
18/12/1969
173van der Graaff
Willem Gerardus
Mr
15/06/1941
174van der Graaff-van der Waal
Agatha Wilhelmina Flora
Ms
27/05/1947
175van der Graaff
Marnix Willem
Mr
14/08/1981
176Heerkens
Joris Michael Gerardus
Mr
08/05/1960
177Heerkens
Thomas Vincentius Maria
Mr
05/04/1965
178Heerkens
Paul Gerardus Antonius
Mr
21/07/1962
179Witteveen
Freek Gerrit
Mr
31/07/1991
180Witteveen
Julie Mathilde
Ms
16/06/1960
181Witteveen
Raoul Johannes
Mr
14/06/1955
182Jhinkoe
Soenderpersad
Mr
04/05/1959
183Ramdien
Dolawatia
Ms
17/08/1966
184Jhinkoe
Radjan Wininder
Mr
07/09/1990
185Jhinkoe
Raisheri Ashwini
Ms
28/08/1996
186Leermans
Maria Adriana
Ms
04/06/1942
187Trugg
Willem Désiré Joseph
Mr
10/05/1946
188van der Velden
Antonetta Petronella Gerarda
Ms
24/07/1951
189Trugg
Marc Willem Hendrik
Mr
09/08/1972
190Schneider
Jolande Gerarda Maria
Ms
16/07/1949
191de Kuijer
Johannes Christiaan
Mr
07/01/1950
192Lee
Kok Chew
Mr
22/12/1978
193Lee
Boo Kwang
Mr
30/12/1941
194Sek
Kiew Far
Ms
16/06/1945
195Lee
Kiah Kheng
Ms
27/08/1971
196Lee
Kiah Hooi
Ms
26/06/1972
197Lee
Kiah Yoong
Ms
21/09/1973
198Lee
Kiah Hong
Ms
15/09/1977
199Liew
Chau Seong
Mr
14/11/1941
200Yeong
Loi Ho
Ms
15/02/1949
201Liew
Huey Min
Ms
03/05/1974
202Liew
Yau Lin
Ms
20/02/1976
203van der Linde
Engelina Cornelia
Ms
13/04/1954
204van der Linde
Gerhardus Evert
Mr
10/08/1958
205Mahler
Hendrik Joseph
Mr
27/02/1950
206Willemsen
Karola Marina
Ms
09/03/1950
207Mahler
Jeroen Joost
Mr
16/03/1984
208Mahler
Felix Tristan
Mr
04/01/1989
209Niewold
Christiaan Hendrik
Mr
13/08/1955
210Niewold
Ernst Martinus Michael Hendrik
Mr
11/11/1984
211Niewold
Julian Johannes Albertus
Mr
03/02/1986
212Niewold
Odulf-Benjamin
Mr
29/10/1987
213Niewold
Astrid Maria Edith Cornelia
Ms
05/01/1995
214de Ridder
Hendrikus Johannes Wilhelmus
Mr
17/04/1937
215de Ridder
Remco
Mr
19/01/1983
216de Ridder
Laura Elisabeth
Ms
21/05/1986
217van der Steen
Maria Jacoba
Ms
04/03/1968
218Wesselink
Chanouk
Ms
27/04/1990
219Marckelbach
Paul Jurgen
Mr
25/04/1975
220Van der Meer
Peter Eduard
Mr
25/10/1967
221Jesurun
Hannele Suzanne
Ms
08/05/1954
222van Keulen
Jacobus Cornelis
Mr
07/07/1932
223de Leeuw
Adrianus Cornelis Theodorus Maria
Mr
12/03/1948
224Otter, den-Pijnenbur
Elisabeth Huberta Joanna Maria
Ms
24/10/1957
225Chu
Kok Chew
Ms
01/01/1928
226Dewa
Zaini Bin Md
Mr
20/06/1944
227Abdullah
Siti Dinah Binti
Ms
05/10/1945
228Dewa
Sharil Zaini
Mr
04/07/1975
229de Kuijer
Paulus Franciscus Johanna Maria
Mr
20/08/1984
230Stuhrmann
Margarete
Ms
06/01/1959
231Niewold
Lidwina Diotima
Ms
29/10/1987
Date of introduction – 10 January 2019
No.
Last Name
First Name
Title English
Date of Birth
1Dijkgraaf-Janssen
Johanna Lena
Ms
30/08/1936
2Adriaanse-Janssen
Johanna Lidia
Ms
24/12/1961
3Janssen
Martin Willem
Mr
17/06/1966
4Mateman-Janssen
Franciska Elena
Ms
30/08/1972
5Waldherr-de Haan
Henrica Joanna Jeanne
Ms
24/10/1958
6de Haan
Herman Gerardus
Mr
14/10/1953
7Bolhaar
Johanna Dieka
Ms
14/10/1926
8de Haan
Leonardus Reinerus
Mr
13/01/1966
9Anderson
Joanna Marie
Ms
13/03/1977
10Ng
Kok Eng
Mr
27/11/1949
11Van Zijtveld-Schardijn
Grace Astrid Georgine
Ms
25/05/1957
12Van Zijtveld
Evert
Mr
27/11/1954
13Ioppa
Elena
Ms
18/06/1970
14Kenke
Chris Willem
Mr
02/07/1988
15Kenke
Denise
Ms
10/10/1984
16Oreshkin
Serge
Mr
09/05/1952
17Oreshkin
Vera
Ms
04/09/1949
Application no. 56328/18
Date of introduction – 23 November 2018
No.
Last Name
First Name
Title English
Date of Birth
1Angline
Ms
07/08/1989
2Baaij
Babs Petronella
Ms
30/07/1975
3Baaij
Yoeki Vos Elisabeth
Ms
21/03/2015
4Besseler
Fredrika
Ms
04/01/1958
5Camfferman
Roxanne
Ms
20/07/1990
6Crolla
Robert
Mr
26/05/1961
7Crolla
Fleur
Ms
18/03/1993
8Essers
Esther
Ms
17/12/1981
9Essers
Eva
Ms
21/12/1983
10Essers
Adrian
Mr
26/09/1950
11Everdink, Van
Adriana
Ms
24/11/1947
12Florentinus
Mignon
Ms
06/02/1942
13Hakse
Richard
Mr
15/03/1940
14Hakse
Richard
Mr
12/12/1963
15Heijningen, Van
Robbert
Mr
04/04/1957
16Huntjens
Marie
Mr
04/07/1960
17Kol
Maria
Ms
08/12/1947
18Kroon
Astrid
Ms
30/06/1987
19Kurver
Joanna
Ms
29/01/1948
20Lam
Herman
Mr
14/07/1944
21Lam
Maria
Ms
04/01/1928
22Lambregts
Willebrordus
Mr
07/02/1979
23Lambregts
Sabine
Ms
06/05/1976
24Lambregts
Antonius
Mr
28/12/1946
25Martens
Richard
Mr
28/03/1965
26Martens
Constantinus
Mr
10/02/1938
27Martens
Constantinus
Mr
30/06/1963
28Mastenbroek
Tosca
Ms
21/12/1968
29Meijer
Hans
Mr
23/01/1946
30Nelissen
Francisca
Ms
14/08/1953
31Nieburg
Dorothea
Ms
20/07/1951
32Noto
Molebatsi
Mr
03/03/1958
33Oost, Van
Flint
Mr
07/11/2001
34Oost, Van
Elisabeth
Ms
22/03/1963
35Paulus
Marie
Ms
14/08/1928
36Ridder, De
Sander
Mr
31/05/1964
37Risah
Jackie
Mr
25/05/1952
38Roo, De
Roy
Mr
06/10/1973
39Schilder
Theodorus
Mr
24/01/1988
40Smallenburg
Adriana
Ms
10/07/1951
41Smallenburg
Charles
Mr
27/05/1928
42Souren
Arno
Mr
01/05/1983
43Souren
Reinier
Mr
02/02/1987
44Souren
Anna
Ms
17/03/1955
45Stok
Johanna
Ms
26/02/1959
46Stuiver
Johannes
Mr
04/09/1948
47Stuiver
Marian
Ms
19/04/1990
48Sutherland
Alice
Ms
06/03/1952
49Tamtelahitu
Jahja
Mr
11/04/1980
50Tensen
Guda
Ms
04/09/1933
51Tol
Catherina
Ms
05/07/1979
52Tongeren, Van
Philip
Mr
06/10/1950
53Tongeren, Van
Bart
Mr
03/02/1988
54Toonen
Wilhelmina
Ms
24/09/1950
55Tournier
Ellen
Ms
14/05/1975
56Uijterlinde
Aplonia
Ms
20/04/1957
57Veldhuis
Maria
Ms
21/03/1938
58Verhaegh
Peter
Mr
03/10/1955
59Verhaegh
Monique
Ms
10/05/1980
60Vranckx
Maarten
Mr
26/08/1988
61Vranckx
Willy
Mr
09/10/1957
62Vranckx
Lianne
Ms
12/08/1999
63Vranckx
Wouter
Mr
07/06/1990
64Vreeswijk, Van
Marinus
Mr
28/02/1968
65Vreeswijk, Van
Nick
Mr
01/06/1995
66Warta
Steffie
Ms
26/04/1965
67Wels
Camiel
Mr
01/08/1970
68Wels
Robert
Mr
24/07/1969
69Zantkuijl
Adriaan
Mr
13/02/1951
70Zantkuijl
Mark
Mr
12/01/1980
71Baaij
Jacob Johannes
Mr
29/09/1947
72Been e/v Ploeg
Elisabeth
Ms
21/10/1933
73Chrystine
Ms
20/12/1995
74Chuah
Peng See
Ms
22/12/1961
75Engels
Jan
Mr
28/10/1959
76Heijningen, Van
Leonardus
Mr
13/04/1930
77Keuning
Hilda
Ms
29/12/1959
78Kraats, van De
Anja
Ms
22/12/1957
79Kroon
Louise
Ms
14/08/1990
80Meijer
Sandra
Ms
16/10/1973
81Murtini
Murtini
Ms
02/05/1980
82Ng
Siang Seng
Mr
30/04/1961
83Nieburg
Julia
Ms
27/11/1982
84Ploeg
Piet
Mr
21/10/1958
85Ploeg
Frederik
Mr
21/06/1933
86Schelb
Heidi
Ms
06/12/1966
87Sengers
Maria
Ms
29/11/1956
88Tamtelahitu
Naomi
Ms
15/12/1983
89Tan
A In
Ms
12/08/1968
90Tournier
Nanda
Ms
17/01/1978
91van Dijk
Linda
Ms
16/10/1952
92Verbaas
Desiree
Ms
23/06/1982
93Vos, De
Walter
Mr
10/11/1958
94Ploeg
Mirjam
Ms
21/09/1991
Date of introduction – 28 January 2019
No.
Last Name
First Name
Title English
Date of Birth
1Ploeg
Sandra Elisa
Ms
14/07/1996
2Van Wiggen
Barbara
Ms
22/05/1978
3Van Wiggen
Jesse
Mr
02/05/1974
4Sukel
Johanna
Ms
02/06/1950
5Chardome
Veronique Franoise Louise
Ms
29/10/1964
APPENDIX II
Application no. 25714/16
List of annexes
Annex No.
Description
Page
1Dutch Safety Board Final Investigative Report & Dutch Safety Board Main Addendum to Final Report & A Addendum V, W, X, Y and Z (Documents 1-7 came pre-consecutively # ’ d)
p. 1-279
2Bellingcat Computer Forensics Report, Sources of the Separatists BUK.
p. 1-35
3Putin War, Nemetsov, May 2015
p. 4-65
4ARES/Armament Research Report #3 November, 2014
p. 1-78
5Russia ’ s Path to War, Bellingcat, 2015
p. 1-67
6How Social Sleuthing Uncovered Evidence of Surface to Air Missiles in Eastern Ukraine (with maps) published July 19,l 2014, Storyful.com
p. 1-22
7An Invasion By Any Other Name: The Kremlin ’ s Dirty War in the Ukraine, The Interpreter, Institute of Modern Russia, 2015
p. 1-84
8Jerome L. Skinner ’ s Credentials (Documents 8-38 are consecutively numbered)
p. 1-6
9Compilations of Disinformation from European Union with sources identified
p. 7-12
10Bellingcat Individual Topic Reports, July, 2014 to November 2014.
p. 13-134
11Bellingcat Individual Topic Reports, January, 2015 to June, 2015
P. 135-287
12Bellingcat Individual Topic Reports, October, 2015.
p. 288-321
13Bellingcat Individual Topic Reports, July to August, 2015
p. 322-402
14Convention on International Civil Aviation December 7, 1944; Chicago Convention
p. 403-453
15Various news articles on Russian Federation derioals, UN security Council Veto, Operation Pawn Storm, Putin ’ s 70th Russion Journal Assembly
p. 454-493
16Dutch Safety Board Final Report; Page 146, Figure 64, Launch Area Simulation.
p. 494-495
17Igore (Girkin) Strelkov Tweets and Retweets.
p. 496-524
18Bellingcat Filterable List of Equipment Sighting.
p. 525-539
19Bellingcat Filterable List of Equipment Sighting, Items 22-16.
p. 540-544
20Bellingcat Filterable List of Equipment Sighting, Individual Data Cards Item 001.
p. 545-547
21Bellingcat Filterable List of Equipment Sighting, Individual Data Cards Item 003.
p. 548-550
22Bellingcat Filterable List of Equipment Sighting, Individual Data Cards Item 0013.
p. 1-7
23Bellingcat Filterable List of Equipment Sighting, Individual Data Cards Item 0017.
p. 1-5
24Bellingcat Filterable List of Equipment Sighting, Individual Data Cards Item 0022.
p. 6-10
25Bellingcat Filterable List of Equipment Sighting, Individual Data Cards Item 0100.
p. 11-16
26Bellingcat Filterable List of Equipment Sighting, Individual Data Cards Item 0101.
p. 17-19
27Bellingcat Filterable List of Equipment Sighting, Individual Data Cards Item 0103.
p. 20-25
28Bellingcat Filterable List of Equipment Sighting, Individual Data Cards Item 0102.
p. 26-29
29Belllngcat Filterable List of Equipment Sighting , Individual Data Cards Item 0105.
p. 30-36
30Bellingcat Filterable List of Equipment Sighting, Individual Data Cards Item 0106.
p. 37-42
31Articles from Rueter ’ s (2) which document Vladimir Putin ’ s Calculations.
p. 43-47
32Signed Sworn Statement of Eliot Higgins, Bellingcat Investigative Computer Forensics Analyst.
p. 48-51
33Pan Am 103 Memorandum of Understanding.
p. 52-53
34Letter to Russian Federation.
p. 54-57
35Signed Sworn Statement of James Hall, former Chairman of the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
p. 58-60
Sealed until Court review because of disclaimer of actual names and identities:
36Separatist Convoy Linked to MH17 BUK Transport.
p. 61-78
37MH17-Potential Suspects and Witnesses from the 53rd Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade.
p. 79-199
38Zip Drive Index
38a. 0003 Troitsky: Buk convoy making a turning
38b. 0017 Neznamovo: Buks on trailers near gas station
38c. 0100 Donetsk: Buk photographed by Paris Match
38d. 0101 Zuhres: Buk and other vehicles
38e. 0102 Torez: Buk on a trailer
38f. 0103 Snizhne Buk driving under its own power
38g. 0104 Snizhne: Buk driving under its own power
38h. 0105 Luhansk: Buk missing a missile
38i. 0106 Donetsk: second photograph of Buk by Paris Match
38J. DSB Accident Reconstruction Video
Digital
39(1) Images and Analysis for US GEO Eye 1 Satellite over Makiiuka on July 17, 2014.
p. 1-8
39(2) Allsource and Stratfor Data and Analysis.
40Bellingcat Report/The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Publishes, "Their" Evidence of MH 17 fakery
p. 1-22
41Bellingcat Report/Post Russia ’ s War in the Ukraine: The Medals and Treacherous Numbers.
p. 1-22
42Bellingcat Report/Post MH17 :The Open Srouce Investigation Two Years Later.
p. 1-42
43(1) Joint Investigative Team - JIT Presentation of Preliminary results of Criminal Investigation MH17 29/09/2016.
p. 1-17
43(2) JIT: Flight MH17 was shot down by a BUK Missile from farmland near Pervomaiskyi.
43(3) MH17: Call for witnesses - English transcription.
43(4) Three articles from Dutch Media.
43(5) Affidavit from Jerome L. Skinner.
44Email releases regarding russian plans for Ukraine and Russian presence in Ukraine and the Pre-attack Political and military escalation of hostilities in the Donbas Region June and July 1-17.
p. 1-39
45Bellingcat Report, March 2016, MH17 - routes, destinations and involvement of the 2nd and 147th Automobile Battalions in June and July 2014.
p. 1-52
46(1) Bellingcat Report: Identifying Khmuryi, the Major-General linked to the downing of MH17, posted February 15, 2017.
p.1-24
46(2) Bellingcat Report: The Role of Sergey Dubinsky in the Downing of MH17.
46(3) Video electronic recordings of intercepted telephone conversations identified above on Page 1 of item 1 of Khmuryi Report above. Identifies Khmuryi as a Russian Officer confirms BUK and use of Russian crew.
Digital
47(1) Pre-MH17 photograph discovered. Note the clear transition in photos on Page 2 of this document from "332" to 3 ( ) 2 to nearly blanked out in the July Paris match photo.
p. 1-66
(2) Drivers of June and July BUK convoy trucks.
48Applicants expert witness reports:
p. 1-30
48James Hall
48Keneth Johnson
48Eliot Higgins
48David Satter
48Vasyl V. Vovk
49Photographs and videos from DSB Investigation, JIT Investigation and the Finland Army Anti-Aircraft Museum, BUK M1 and Telar Exhibit.
Digital
50Bellingcat Report on Russian Colonel General Identified as Key MH 17 Figure, Photos and intercepted Telecommunications (hard copy and digital for intercepted Telecommunications)
Digital (50.2)
51UK Governement Intelligence and Security Committtee of Parliament Report and British Intelligence Report on Source of MH 17 Murder Weapon
52US State Department Report, Marking the Third Anniversary of the Downing of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17
53New MH 17 Photograph Geolocated to Donetsk
54The Open Source Investigatio, Three Years Later, Bellingcat Report
55JIT Publishes New Photograph of Buk 332 from the Day of MH 17 Downing, Bellingcat Report
56Pre-MH 17 Photograph of Russian Buk 332 Discovered, Bellingcat Report
57Article from Dutch News on Ukrainian and Russian NOTAMS and copy of Russian Federation, Rostov FIR/ATC NOTAN V6158/14
Application no. 56328/18
List of a nnexes in chronological order of their submission in accordance with the application and explanatory notes
1. Explanatory notes to Sections E, F and G of this form p. 1
2. UN Resolution 2166 United Nations Security Council p. 22
3. Investigation report of the Dutch Safety Board p. 25
4. Bellingcat report ‘ MH 17, The Open Source Investigation Three Years Later ’ p. 323
5. Bellingcat report ‘ MH17: Potential Suspects and Witnesses from the 53rd
Anti-Aircraft Missile Brigade ’ p. 397
6. Animation of flight MH17 MEMORY STICK
7. Animation reconstruction air disaster MEMORY STICK
8. Animation route convoy MEMORY STICK
9. JIT: Presentation of the initial results of the criminal investigation MH17 28-09-2016; p. 516
10. JIT: MH17 shot down by Buk rocket from agricultural field near Pervomaiskyi,
28 September 2016 p. 530
11. Animation forensic examination MEMORY STICK
12. Animation of the weapon MEMORY STICK
13. JIT reaction to press conference Russian Ministry of Defence; p. 537
14. Intercepted conversation 1 MEMORY STICK
15. Intercepted conversation 2 June 2015, 14:02:13 hours MEMORY STICK
16. JIT MH17 press meeting MH17, May 24, 2018 MEMORY STICK
17. Bellingcat: ‘ Tracking the Trailers: Investigation of MH17 BUK ’ s Russian Convoy ’ p. 543
18. Declaration of liability of the Russian Federation by the Netherlands and Australia p. 558
19. ‘ Russia under fire at UN over downing MH17 ’ p. 560
20. UN News: ‘ UN chief notes ‘ with concern ’ report holding Russia liable for downing airliner p. 564
21. NRC: ‘ Russian Ministry of Defence: Buk rocket that downed MH17 came down from Ukraine ’ p. 569
22. Interview Ambassador Shulgin: ‘ MH17 investigation is biased ’ p. 574
23. Interview Ambassador Shulgin Russia MH17 investigation is biased MEMORY STICK
24. Interview Ambassador Shulgin Russian MH17 suspect will not be extradited MEMORY STICK
25. Complete interview with Ambassador Shulgin MEMORY STICK
26. Volkskrant: ‘ Russia had nothing to do with bringing down MH17 ’ - Putin continues to deny, despite JIT investigation p. 580
27. RTL Nieuws: ‘ Russia: discussion about MH 17 should focus on Ukraine ’ s liability ’ p. 593
28. JIT: ‘ Radar experts confirm earlier conclusion JIT ’ p. 600
29. Volkskrant: ‘ Russia shows radar images: ‘ MH17 not shot from rebel-held area ’ p. 604
30. Trouw: ‘ Why Russia does not admit mistakes and does not admit guilt about MH 17 ’ p. 611
31. RF press conference on the MH17 disaster MEMORY STICK
32. Volkskrant: International Court of Justice examines whether Russia is guilty of downing MH17 ’ p. 616
33. Documents complaints procedure Ukraine against Russia submitted to ICJ, 19 April 2017p. 622
34. Documents complaints procedure Ukraine against Russia submitted to ICJ, 1 October 2018 p. 641
35. Bellingcat: ‘ BUK launch site data in the Dutch Safety Board ’ s MH 17 Investigation ’ p. 644
36. JIT: MH17 shot down by Buk rocket from agricultural field near Pervomaiskyi, 28
September 2016 p. 654
37. JIT: ‘ Update criminal investigation MH17 disaster ’ p. 660
38. Bellingcat: ‘ Name of general involved in BUK rocket MH17 known ’ p. 666
39. Bellingcat: ‘ Russian Colonel General Identified as key MH17 figure ’ p. 669
40. Volkskrant: ‘ Bellingcat: highly placed Russian army officer main suspect in MH17 case ’ p. 711
41. MH17 - Russian GRU commander ‘ Orion ’ Identified as Oleg Ivannikov ’ p. 718
42. European Parliament resolution of 13 September 2012 on the political use of justice in Russia (2012/2789(RSP)) p. 734
43. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers of 30
April 2014 (A/HRC/26/32/Add.1) p. 738
44. European Parliament resolution of 12 March 2015 on the murder of the Russian
opposition leader Boris Nemtsov and the state of democracy in Russia (2015/2592
(RSP) p. 760
45. Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, 25 February 2016, ‘ As long as the judicial system of the Russian federation does not become more independent doubts
about its effectiveness remain ’ p. 767
46. European Parliament resolution of 6 April 2017 on Russia, the arrest of Alexei Navalny and other protestors (2017/2646(RSP) p. 770
47. Concluding observations of the UN Human Rights Committee 2 April 2015 of the
review issued by the Russian Federation p. 776
48. Recommendations UN Human Rights Committee p. 780
49. News article Lawyers for Lawyers, showing that lawyers in the Russian Federation experience inappropriate interference, obstruction and intimidation in their work p. 793
50. News article Raam op Rusland: ‘ The Russian court is a nightmare ’ p. 797
51. News article Lawyers for Lawyers, showing that lawyers in the Russian Federation
experience inappropriate interference, obstruction and intimidation in their work p. 815
52. News article Lawyers for Lawyers, showing that lawyers in the Russian Federation
experience inappropriate interference, obstruction and intimidation in their work p. 819
53. News article Lawyers for Lawyers, showing that lawyers in the Russian Federation
experience inappropriate interference, obstruction and intimidation in their work p. 823
54. News article NRC: ‘ State manipulates judge in Russia ’ p. 827
55. Article NL Times ‘ MH17 relatives entitled to millions in damages: U.S. court ’ p. 832