Facts
The Federal Court had to rule on an administrative appeal by [A.X.] and [B.X.] against a decision of the Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich. The Higher Court had granted legal assistance to Ukraine in a criminal proceeding against [A.X.] . [A.X.] was Prime Minister of Ukraine from 1996 to 1997 and is being prosecuted for bribery, abuse of office, and embezzlement.
The applicants argued that legal assistance should be refused due to human rights violations in Ukraine. They cited reports of ECHR violations in Ukraine and claimed that they were directly affected by them.
The Federal Court examined the applicants' complaints and came to the conclusion that legal assistance could not be refused. It stated that Switzerland would violate its international obligations if it were to extradite a person to a state where their treatment contrary to the ECHR was seriously to be feared.
Considerations
The Federal Court stated that the applicants could generally invoke the risk of a violation of Art. 5 or 6 ECHR in the Ukrainian criminal proceedings or treatment contrary to Art. 3 ECHR in the event of their detention in Ukraine. However, it examined whether the applicants objectively and seriously had reason to fear a serious violation of human rights in the requesting state that directly affected them.
The Court came to the conclusion that the applicant who is in Ukraine is not directly affected by possible violations of Art. 6 ECHR, as she is not accused and there are no indications that she could be arrested. The applicant who is in the USA, on the other hand, can invoke his right protected by Art. 6 ECHR that the criminal proceedings against him in Ukraine are conducted before an independent court.
The Court examined whether the reports submitted by the applicant raise credible concerns that the Ukrainian judiciary is not independent…