After 12 Years Of Deliberations, ECHR Concludes Georgia Began Hostilities Against Russia In August 2008

Via SouthFront.org,

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has declared
unfounded the accusations of Georgia against Russia in connection
with the events of August 2008 in South Ossetia, the press service
of the Russian Ministry of Justice reported.

It is noted that on January 21st, the decision of the Grand
Chamber of the ECHR on the interstate complaint “Georgia against
Russia (II)” was published, the subject of which is the events of
August 2008 in South Ossetia and their consequences.

The Court asserted that since August 12, 2008, “strong Russian
presence and the South Ossetian and Abkhazian authorities’
dependency on the Russian Federation indicated that there had been
continued “effective control” over South Ossetia and
Abkhazia.”

After almost 12 years of trial, the ECHR ruled that Russia
should not be held accountable under the Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms for incidents
that occurred when Russian servicemen repulsed an attack by the
Georgian army on the peacekeeping contingent and local civilian
population during the events in South Ossetia.

The court also did not support Tbilisi’s statements
about the alleged invasion of the Russian army into the territory
of South Ossetia on August 7, 2008, that is, the day before the
start of the Georgian aggression.

As Russian Deputy Minister of Justice Mikhail Halperin noted,
Georgia tried to prove that the European Convention on Human Rights
is applied not only in peacetime, but also during hostilities,
which contradicts the foundations of international humanitarian
law.

According to him, the Russian side was able to convince the
judges that the legal assessment of the events of August 2008 in
Abkhazia and South Ossetia is not within their jurisdiction.

“Also, the ECHR has not established a single case of
violation of the rights of the civilian population by Russian
servicemen during the events of August 2008,” Halperin
stressed.

At the same time, the ministry noted that they do not agree with
the conclusions of the ECHR, according to which the Russian side is
responsible for the incidents that occurred after August 12 in
Abkhazia and South Ossetia, although the court could not establish
the involvement of Russian military personnel in them.

The ECHR judgment in the Georgia v. Russia (II) case does not
contain a decision on monetary compensation. The relevant issue was
left by the court in Strasbourg for further consideration.

The conclusions regarding that are the following:

The ECHR has also established numerous violations of the
Convention by Russia and ruled:

• by sixteen votes to one, that there had been an administrative
  practice contrary to Articles 2, 3, and 8 of the Convention,
  involving the right to life, prohibition of torture and respect for
  private and family life, respectively, and Article 1 of Protocol
  No. 1 to the Convention, involving the protection of property.

• unanimously that the Georgian civilians detained by the S.
  Ossetian forces in Tskhinvali between approximately 10 and 27
  August 2008 had fallen within the Russian jurisdiction for the
  purposes of Article 1, and that there had been a breach of Article
  3, the prohibition of torture “as regards the conditions of
  detention of some 160 Georgian civilians and the humiliating acts
  which had caused them suffering and had to be regarded as inhuman
  and degrading treatment.”

• unanimously that there had been an administrative practice
  contrary to Article 5, involving the right to liberty and security
  as regards the arbitrary detention of Georgian civilians in August
  2008.

• unanimously, that the Georgian prisoners of war detained in
  Tskhinvali between 8 and 17 August 2008 by the S. Ossetian forces
  had fallen within the Russian legal responsibility for the purposes
  of the Convention; and by sixteen votes to one, that there had been
  an administrative practice contrary to Article 3 (prohibition of
  torture) as regards the acts of torture of which the Georgian
  prisoners of war had been victims.

• by sixteen votes to one, that preventing of the Georgian
  nationals from returning to S. Ossetia or Abkhazia had fallen
  within the Russian jurisdiction; and by sixteen to one that there
  had been an administrative practice contrary to Article 2 of
  Protocol No. 4, freedom of movement, linked to the inability of
  Georgian nationals to return to their homes;

• unanimously that Russia had a procedural obligation under
  Article 2 to carry out “an adequate and effective
  investigation” not only into the events which had occurred after
  the end of hostilities (after the August 12, 2008 ceasefire ) but
  also into the events during the active phase of hostilities (8 to
  12 August 2008);

• and by sixteen votes to 1, that in this regard there had been a
  violation of Article 2 in its procedural aspect, meaning the breach
  of the obligation to conduct an effective probe into alleged
  breaches of the Article’s substantive limb.

• by sixteen votes to 1, that Russia failed to meet its
  obligations under Article 38, by failing to examine the case.

• unanimously, that the question regarding Article 41, involving
  just satisfaction “was not ready for decision and should
  therefore be reserved in full.”

As such, despite years of accusations by the US and Co.,
it was established that Georgia was actually the side that began
the hostilities that led to the two-day war of 2008 between Tbilisi
and Moscow.