How to ensure the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights concerning the Russian Federation, including payment of the compensation awarded

Doc. 16478: compendium of written amendments | Doc. 16478 | 30/09/2026 | Final version

Contents

A Draft Resolution

B Draft Recommendation

Compendium index

Amendment 6 Amendment 7 Sub-amendment 1 to amendment 7 Amendment 1 Sub-amendment 1 to amendment 1 Amendment 3 Sub-amendment 1 to amendment 3 Amendment 8 Amendment 4 Amendment 2 Amendment 11 Amendment 9 Amendment 5 Amendment 10

Caption: AdoptedRejectedWithdrawnNo electronic votes

ADraft Resolution

1Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (“the Court”) concerning the Russian Federation provide an unambiguous record of authoritarian repression, including human rights violations committed in the territory of Council of Europe member States. The list of violations includes the use of rape and sexual violence as a weapon of war, the indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas, the murder of political opponents, enforced disappearances, targeted violence against journalists, a failure to prevent and prohibit human trafficking, unlimited State surveillance, draconian control of public debate, attempts to destroy independent civil society, the unlawful transfer and adoption of children, and the abduction, detention and torture of persons. The Court’s judgments establish an authoritative judicial record of a regime that is oppressive to its own people and an unrelenting menace to its neighbours.

2Russia was excluded from the Council of Europe on 16 March 2022. Six months later, it ceased to be a Party to the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS No. 5, “the Convention”). Although Article 58 of the Convention provides for a State to cease to be a Party to the Convention, it does not release the State from its obligations in respect of events occurring while it was still a Party. Recalling Resolution 2494 (2023) and Resolution 2599 (2025) “Implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights”, the Parliamentary Assembly notes that Russia has an unconditional legal obligation under Article 46 of the Convention to implement judgments of the Court in respect of violations that occurred up to 16 September 2022. This obligation under international law does not diminish with time and cannot be set aside by Russian domestic law.

3Prior to the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia already had a poor record in implementing judgments of the Court. This deteriorated significantly following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The authorities ceased all communication with the Committee of Ministers in the context of its supervision of implementation of the Court’s judgments. On 11 June 2022 a new law entered into force in Russia, which set out that any judgment of the Court becoming final after 15 March 2022 would not be enforced. That law also specifies that just satisfaction awarded in judgments that became final before 15 March 2022 would be paid only until 1 January 2023, that such payments would be made exclusively in roubles, and that they would only be made to bank accounts located within the Russian Federation.

4The Assembly welcomes the steps taken by the Committee of Ministers to continue supervising the execution of the Court’s judgments concerning the Russian Federation. These steps include strengthening co-operation with United Nations bodies, engaging with Russian civil society, issuing communications directed at the Russian authorities, and enhancing the visibility of the judgment implementation process. These measures preserve international attention and ensure that Russia’s legal obligations remain on the institutional and historical record.

5Whilst the steps taken to date are welcome, they are not sufficient. Thousands of victims have been denied justice in a situation which is unprecedented for the Council of Europe. A former member State refuses to pay the just satisfaction awarded by the Court, refuses to engage with the Committee of Ministers in relation to the implementation of the Court’s judgments, and continues its illegal war of aggression against another member State. In response to this profound challenge to its legal and political authority, the Council of Europe should take any pragmatic and achievable steps available in order to secure, initially, at least partial implementation of the judgments concerned. In this regard, the Assembly recalls the Reykjavik Declaration, in which Heads of State and Government of Council of Europe member States affirmed, “[t]he need to make every effort to ensure the execution of the Court’s judgments by the Russian Federation”.

6One important area where additional steps should be taken is ensuring the payment of the just satisfaction owed. The Russian Federation now owes over €3.3 billion in unpaid just satisfaction awarded by the Court, including default interest. Over € 424 million is owed as just satisfaction awarded in inter-State cases concerning Georgia, and over €2.9 billion is owed as just satisfaction awarded in individual cases (€2.7 billion of which relates to the “Yukos” case). The amount of just satisfaction due will only continue to increase, as there are approximately 5 700 applications pending before the Court against the Russian Federation, a large proportion of which relate to Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine.

7In member and observer States, legal grounds may already exist for action to be taken to ensure the payment of just satisfaction owed by the Russian Federation. Such action may include steps by national authorities to freeze and repurpose Russian assets or litigation by applicants seeking to enforce the Court’s judgments in national jurisdictions outside Russia. Legislation at national level can strengthen and support such avenues.

8The Court has found the Russian Federation responsible for serious human rights violations in two inter-State judgments in cases brought by Ukraine. In the second of these, Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia, concerning the war in eastern Ukraine since 2014 and the full-scale invasion launched on 24 February 2022, the Court found that the nature and scale of the abuses committed were unprecedented in the history of the Council of Europe. They constituted a flagrant disregard for the fundamental values of the Organisation and for the foundations of the international legal order established after the Second World War. Whilst the Court’s quantification of the just satisfaction owed in the two inter-State cases is still pending, given the scale of the damage inflicted on Ukraine, any awards could potentially amount to billions, tens of billions, or hundreds of billions of euros.

• Amendment 6

30 September 2026

Tabled by Ms Lesia ZABURANNA, Mr Taras BATENKO, Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA-FEDORENKO, Ms Larysa BILOZIR, Mr Serhii KALCHENKO, Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO, Ms Tamila TASHEVA, Mr Emanuelis ZINGERIS

In the draft resolution, at the end of paragraph 8, insert the following sentence:

"The Assembly invites the Court to give priority to the determination of just satisfaction in these inter-State cases, so that the mechanisms envisaged in this resolution can become operational without delay."

9The Assembly notes that the Government of Ukraine is in a unique situation with regard to obtaining the payment of any just satisfaction to be awarded in cases concerning the Russian Federation’s war of aggression against Ukraine. Recalling Resolution 2556 (2024) and Resolution 2605 (2025) “Legal and human rights aspects of the Russian Federation’s aggression against Ukraine”, the Assembly considers that the repurposing of Russian State assets would constitute a lawful countermeasure under international law for the following reasons:

9.1the Russian Federation’s actions against Ukraine are a violation of the United Nations Charter and an act of aggression, and Russia must bear the legal consequences of all of its internationally wrongful acts arising from the aggression;

9.2repurposing assets would seek to induce compliance by the Russian Federation with its international legal obligations, including its obligation to cease the aggression and to make reparation to Ukraine;

9.3the repurposing would be proportionate, as any just satisfaction awarded by the Court could not exceed, and indeed would be a small subset of, the amount of damage suffered by Ukraine as a consequence of Russia’s internationally wrongful aggression against Ukraine;

9.4the repurposing would also be temporary and reversible, given that the amount would be repurposed and transferred pending payment by the Russian Federation of the compensation and just satisfaction due. Any amount transferred and subsequently disbursed to Ukraine would necessarily be deducted from the total sum owed by the Russian Federation in unpaid just satisfaction.

10Many judgments of the Court concerning the Russian Federation detail outrageous violations of human dignity. In a small minority of such cases, the Court provides the identity of the individuals responsible. In other judgments, the names of perpetrators are anonymised, but the persons involved may be easily identifiable from other sources, including judgments or credible reports. The Council of Europe does not have effective tools, at present, to ensure that the Russian Federation properly investigates such violations and punishes the perpetrators, as generally required for the execution of those judgments. However, where individual perpetrators are identifiable, member and observer States of the Council of Europe should take their own actions to hold them accountable.

• Amendment 7
• Sub-amendment 1 to amendment 7

30 September 2026

Tabled by Mr Max LUCKS, Mr Markus WIECHEL, Mr Julian JOSWIG, Ms Franziska KERSTEN, Ms Gabriela HEINRICH

In the draft resolution, after paragraph 10, insert the following paragraph:

"The Assembly further notes that civil society organisations and individual witnesses who hold and provide evidence supporting the enforcement of the Court's judgments and the maintenance of sanctions regimes face retaliation from the Russian Federation and from sanctioned entities operating through proxies in Council of Europe member States. The Assembly calls on member and observer States to establish effective protection mechanisms for such persons and organisations, in line with Resolution 2669 (2026) "Fighting back against transnational repression", in particular by providing alternative procedures for the renewal of identity and travel documents for those who cannot safely approach the authorities of the state that issued them, by ensuring that INTERPOL is informed of extradition refusals and that corresponding notices or diffusions are reviewed, by ensuring the correction or deletion of data obtained or shared through abusive requests from perpetrator states, and by designating retaliation against such persons as an aggravating factor in any assessment of the requesting state's compliance record."

30 September 2026

Tabled by Baroness Thérèse COFFEY, Ms Kate OSBORNE, Lord Leslie GRIFFITHS, Baroness Lyn BROWN, Lord Don TOUHIG

In amendment 7, replace the words "after paragraph 10" with the following words:

"after paragraph 16"

11In the unique situation in which a former member State of the Council of Europe refuses to implement judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, refuses to engage with the Committee of Ministers in relation to the implementation of judgments of the Court against it, and continues to wage an illegal war of aggression against another Council of Europe member State, the Assembly calls for additional steps to be taken. These should seek to secure the payment of any just satisfaction awarded, and to ensure accountability for the individual perpetrators of serious human rights violations.

• Amendment 1
• Sub-amendment 1 to amendment 1

30 September 2026

Tabled by Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO, Ms Alicia KEARNS, Mr Taras BATENKO, Ms Iryna KONSTANKEVYCH, Mr Serhii SOBOLIEV, Ms Larysa BILOZIR, Mr Paweł JABŁOŃSKI

Votes: 60 in favor 0 against 0 abstention

In the draft resolution, after paragraph 11, insert the following paragraph:

"The Assembly calls on the Russian Federation to provide, through an appropriate international mechanism or mechanisms, all available and reliable information concerning each Ukrainian child unlawfully deported or forcibly transferred to the Russian Federation or to territories temporarily occupied by the Russian Federation, including the child’s full name, date and place of birth, Ukrainian citizenship and place of residence prior to the transfer, the date and circumstances of the transfer, current location, legal status, any change of name or nationality, and information concerning adoption, guardianship, foster placement or institutionalisation. The Assembly calls on member and observer States to support the collection, verification and secure exchange of such information with the competent Ukrainian authorities, with a view to identifying each child, facilitating their safe return and restoring family links."

Explanatory note

Self-explanatory

30 September 2026

Tabled by Baroness Thérèse COFFEY, Ms Kate OSBORNE, Lord Leslie GRIFFITHS, Baroness Lyn BROWN, Lord Don TOUHIG

Votes: 59 in favor 0 against 0 abstention

In amendment 1, replace the words "after paragraph 11" with the following words:

"after paragraph 16"

12The Assembly stresses the need to preserve Russian State assets under the jurisdiction of member and observer States, until the Russian Federation has fulfilled its obligations to provide reparations and pay just satisfaction arising from its aggression against Ukraine.

• Amendment 3
• Sub-amendment 1 to amendment 3
• Amendment 8

30 September 2026

Tabled by Ms Lesia ZABURANNA, Mr Taras BATENKO, Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA-FEDORENKO, Mr Dominik OBERHOFER, Ms Larysa BILOZIR, Mr Serhii KALCHENKO, Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO, Ms Tamila TASHEVA, Mr Emanuelis ZINGERIS

If adopted, amendment 8 falls.

Votes: 51 in favor 6 against 2 abstentions

In the draft resolution, replace paragraph 12 with the following paragraph:

"The Assembly stresses that Russian State assets under the jurisdiction of member and observer States, including the principal of the immobilised assets of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation and not merely the proceeds thereof, must not simply be held but confiscated and used to compensate Ukraine and Ukrainian victims for the damage, loss and injury caused by the Russian aggression, for as long as the Russian Federation refuses to fulfil its obligations to provide reparations and pay just satisfaction. Pending such use, these assets must remain immobilised, and no arrangement for the cessation of hostilities or peace settlement should provide for their release to the Russian Federation before full reparation has been made."

30 September 2026

Tabled by Baroness Thérèse COFFEY, Ms Kate OSBORNE, Lord Leslie GRIFFITHS, Baroness Lyn BROWN, Lord Don TOUHIG

Votes: 53 in favor 1 against 0 abstention

In amendment 3, first sentence, replace the word "confiscated" with the following word:

"repurposed"

30 September 2026

Tabled by Mr Max LUCKS, Mr Markus WIECHEL, Mr Julian JOSWIG, Ms Franziska KERSTEN, Ms Gabriela HEINRICH

Falls if amendment 3 is adopted.

In the draft resolution, at the end of paragraph 12, insert the following words:

"The Assembly notes that documentary evidence, including signed commercial agreements between designated entities and Russian state military enterprises, demonstrates that certain Russian banks presented as private by their shareholders were in fact used as financing buffers between the Russian state and its military-industrial complex. The assets of such entities should be treated in the same manner as Russian state assets for the purposes of this resolution where there is objective evidence of their integration with the Russian military economy."

13In light of these exceptional circumstances, the Assembly urges member and observer States of the Council of Europe to:

13.1adopt without delay the necessary legal and/or practical measures to repurpose assets of the Russian State that are within their jurisdiction so that, when the European Court of Human Rights delivers judgment(s) awarding just satisfaction in inter-State cases brought by Ukraine against the Russian Federation relating to the war of aggression, those assets may be transferred to a funding mechanism enabling the payment of the just satisfaction awarded;

13.2to the extent that it is legally possible, ensure that their national legal frameworks allow for the domestic enforcement of any European Court of Human Rights’ just satisfaction award against the Russian Federation, for as long as Russia refuses to pay it.

• Amendment 4
• Amendment 2

30 September 2026

Tabled by Ms Lesia ZABURANNA, Mr Taras BATENKO, Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA-FEDORENKO, Mr Dominik OBERHOFER, Ms Larysa BILOZIR, Mr Serhii KALCHENKO, Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO, Ms Tamila TASHEVA, Mr Emanuelis ZINGERIS

In the draft resolution, after paragraph 13.2, insert the following paragraph:

"introduce into their domestic legislation the potential to confiscate the assets of an aggressor State which refuses to fulfil its obligation under international law to make reparation for its internationally wrongful acts, and to transfer such assets to the mechanisms established to compensate the victims of the aggression, including the funding mechanism referred to in paragraph 13.1 and other possible mechanisms associated with the future International Claims Commission for Ukraine;"

30 September 2026

Tabled by Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO, Ms Larysa BILOZIR, Mr Taras BATENKO, Ms Iryna KONSTANKEVYCH, Mr Paweł JABŁOŃSKI

In the draft resolution, before paragraph 14, insert the following paragraph:

"The Assembly calls on member and observer States, in accordance with their domestic law and applicable international law, where there are reasonable grounds to establish that they concern a Ukrainian child unlawfully deported or forcibly transferred from Ukraine, not to give legal effect, to acts or documents issued by the Russian Federation or its occupation authorities which purport to alter the child’s name, nationality, place of birth, family status or other elements of the child’s identity. States should facilitate the restoration and legal recognition of the child’s Ukrainian identity and family links, in accordance with the best interests of the child."

Explanatory note

Self-explanatory

14The Assembly calls on member and observer States of the Council of Europe, as well as the European Union, to impose targeted individual sanctions in the following circumstances:

14.1any judgment of the European Court of Human Rights concerning the Russian Federation has found the Russian authorities responsible for a violation of the right to life under Article 2 of the Convention, the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3, or the prohibition of slavery and forced labour under Article 4;

14.2the violation is of notable scale and/or impact, for example due to the number of victims, the targeted and deliberate nature of the violation, and/or its repetitive character;

14.3one or more State agents, or persons linked to the State, are responsible for the violation and are either identified in the judgment or are otherwise identifiable;

14.4the judgment of the Court, and/or the supervision process before the Committee of Ministers, indicate a failure by the Russian authorities to hold the individual(s) concerned accountable.

15In the circumstances identified in paragraph 14, the Assembly also:

15.1encourages member and observer States whose domestic law provides for universal jurisdiction for the most serious crimes to take appropriate action if the persons responsible are found within their jurisdiction;

15.2invites the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate where the human rights violations identified by the European Court of Human Rights suggest that a crime within the ICC’s jurisdiction may have been committed.

16The Assembly invites the European Court of Human Rights to ensure that, where possible, future judgments concerning the Russian Federation identify by name the individuals responsible for serious human rights violations, as envisaged in paragraph 14 above.

• Amendment 11

30 September 2026

Tabled by Mr Eerik-Niiles KROSS, Mr Aleksei JEVGRAFOV, Mr Iulian BULAI, Ms Kadri TALI, Ms Marijana PULJAK

In the draft resolution, after paragraph 16, insert the following paragraph:

"The Assembly notes that, under the Court’s records and archives policy, single-judge files are destroyed one year after the final decision, while Committee, Chamber and Grand Chamber files are subject to sorting five years after the case ends. In Lebedeva and Others v. Russia, notified in September 2026, the Court struck out 879 remaining individual applications against the Russian Federation, excluding conflict-related cases. These files may contain unique evidence of human rights violations, including testimony, medical records and domestic court documents. The Assembly therefore invites the Court, exceptionally, to preserve in full the files of all applications against the Russian Federation, including those declared inadmissible or struck out, until the Russian Federation resumes compliance with its continuing obligations under the Convention, subject to appropriate safeguards for personal data and confidentiality."

Explanatory note

Preserving the evidence sends an important signal both to the Russian regime and the Russian people

CDraft Recommendation

1The Parliamentary Assembly draws the Committee of Ministers’ attention to Resolution ... (2026) “How to ensure the implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights concerning the Russian Federation, including payment of the compensation awarded”, which explores ways in which the Council of Europe should address Russia’s failure to comply with its binding legal obligation to implement judgments of the Court.

2To ensure the payment of just satisfaction awarded by the European Court of Human Rights against the Russian Federation, the Assembly recommends that:

2.1a funding mechanism be created, under the auspices of the Council of Europe, to receive repurposed Russian State assets and facilitate payment of any just satisfaction awarded by the Court in inter-State cases brought by Ukraine against the Russian Federation; the amounts disbursed through the mechanism should be credited against the just satisfaction owed by the Russian Federation. The funding mechanism could take the form of a separate ad hoc entity or be part of a future compensation fund mandated to pay compensation for damage, loss or injury caused by the Russian Federation’s internationally wrongful acts in or against Ukraine arising from its war of aggression;

• Amendment 9
• Amendment 5

30 September 2026

Tabled by the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights

If adopted, amendment 5 falls.

Votes: 54 in favor 4 against 1 abstention

In the draft recommendation, replace paragraph 2.1 with the following paragraphs:

“- an ad hoc funding mechanism be created, under the auspices of the Council of Europe, with the mandate to recover Russian State-owned assets and proportionately disburse them to applicants who have been awarded just satisfaction by the Court in cases against the Russian Federation; the amounts disbursed through the mechanism should be credited against the just satisfaction owed by the Russian Federation; - any assets of the Russian Central Bank that have already been frozen or immobilised and are transferred to the funding mechanism referred to in paragraph 2.1, or any other suitable mechanism, are used exclusively to pay the just satisfaction to be awarded by the Court to Ukraine in inter-state cases against the Russian Federation concerning the war of aggression.”

30 September 2026

Tabled by Ms Lesia ZABURANNA, Mr Taras BATENKO, Ms Mariia MEZENTSEVA-FEDORENKO, Mr Dominik OBERHOFER, Ms Larysa BILOZIR, Mr Serhii KALCHENKO, Mr Oleksii GONCHARENKO, Ms Tamila TASHEVA, Mr Emanuelis ZINGERIS

Falls if amendment 9 is adopted.

In the draft recommendation, at the end of paragraph 2.1, insert the following words:

"the mechanism should be designed in co-ordination with the Register of Damage Caused by the Aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine and the future International Claims Commission for Ukraine, and should be capable of receiving confiscated Russian State assets, including the principal of frozen Central Bank assets."

2.2the Committee of Ministers should mandate a Council of Europe inter-governmental body to carry out a comprehensive study of the legal frameworks of Council of Europe member States, identifying jurisdictions which permit domestic enforcement of just satisfaction awards against the Russian Federation, as well as any changes that would be necessary and legally feasible to facilitate such enforcement;

2.3the Committee of Ministers examine the feasibility of elaborating a recommendation inviting member States to take any steps necessary, whenever legally possible, to ensure that their national legal frameworks allow for the domestic enforcement of the European Court of Human Rights’ just satisfaction awards against the Russian Federation, for as long as Russia refuses to pay them.

3Furthermore, the Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers:

3.1prepare a list of individuals who – according to the findings of the European Court of Human Rights – have participated in committing human rights violations, where the following criteria are met:

3.1.1there is a final judgment of the Court concerning the Russian Federation that has found the Russian authorities responsible for a violation of the right to life under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ETS N°5), the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3, or the prohibition of slavery and forced labour under Article 4;

3.1.2the violation is of notable scale and/or impact, for example due to the number of victims, the targeted and deliberate nature of the violation, and/or its repetitive character;

3.1.3one or more State agents, or persons linked to the State, are responsible for the violation and are either identified in the judgment or are otherwise identifiable;

3.1.4the judgment of the Court, and/or the supervision process before the Committee of Ministers, indicate a failure by the Russian authorities to hold the individual(s) concerned accountable;

3.2invite submissions from civil society groups and others under Rule 9 of the Rules of the Committee of Ministers for the supervision of the execution of judgments and of the terms of friendly settlements, in order to assist with the preparation of the list;

3.3communicate the list of individuals to member and observer States, the European Union, the International Criminal Court, and other relevant bodies, inviting them to consider applying targeted individual sanctions against the named individuals and/or, where appropriate, to consider undertaking criminal investigations and prosecutions;

3.4ensure that the list is updated periodically and communicated to relevant stakeholders, as new judgments are delivered by the Court;

3.5make the list public, together with a record of the sanctions which have been imposed on the individuals concerned.

• Amendment 10

30 September 2026

Tabled by Mr Eerik-Niiles KROSS, Mr Aleksei JEVGRAFOV, Mr Iulian BULAI, Mr Emanuelis ZINGERIS, Ms Kadri TALI, Ms Octavie MODERT, Ms Marijana PULJAK

At the end of the draft recommendation, insert the following paragraph:

"The Assembly further recommends that the Committee of Ministers provide the Court with the resources necessary to preserve the complete files of all applications lodged against the Russian Federation until the Russian Federation resumes its obligations under the Convention, and examine, with due regard to the applicants' consent and data protection, how these files could assist national and international bodies investigating serious human rights violations."

Explanatory note

Ensures the call to preserve evidence is backed with funds