A/HRC/41/CRP.2 issued decisions in favour of civilians, obliging the Government of Ukraine to provide monetary reparation to families who lost loved ones due to the hostilities. OHCHR commends these positive steps by the judiciary and encourages the Government of Ukraine to ensure implementation of these rulings.25 OHCHR also notes that the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court is formulating its position on this category of cases.26 Court case on reparation for family member killed due to hostilities, Luhansk region The Appeal Court of Luhansk region ruled in favour of a woman seeking reparation for the death of her daughter during the armed conflict in eastern Ukraine. According to that judgment, the Government of Ukraine was obliged to provide monetary reparation for the family. The decision entered into force on 19 November 2018. While the Supreme Court previously refused to suspend its execution, this decision was then suspended by the Supreme Court upon the second request of the Ministry of Justice which argued that this amount of compensation, if provided to the plaintiff, would constitute an excessive intake from the State Budget. OHCHR recalls that under international law, victims should be provided with adequate, effective and prompt reparation for harm suffered. Civilians who have received injuries and families who have lost their members due to the conflict must be provided with remedy and reparation. 2. Restitution and compensation for use or damage of private property “How can I evaluate the amount of compensation due to me? What is the value of my son’s childhood in the village? What is of cost of my family’s separation for three years and the rented flats I paid for? What is the cost of my father’s early death because he couldn’t obtain proper medical assistance during the armed conflict? How can I evaluate all this? The compensation that I might eventually receive is not worth the time and nerves I would need to spend going from one governmental office to another and hearing from them ‘could you come tomorrow?’ And how can I prove that I had this and that if it is all gone now?” - Civilian who has not been provided compensation for the military use of his house 34. During the reporting period, OHCHR continued to document, including remotely, cases of pillage of civilian homes on both sides of the contact line. For instance, OHCHR received allegations that civilian homes and property were pillaged in the village of Bezymenne (territory controlled by ‘Donetsk people’s republic’), and in the Governmentcontrolled villages of Novozvanivka, Staryi Aidar and Troitske, in violation of international humanitarian law.27 35. In Government-controlled Novozvanivka, Staryi Aidar, Troitske and Zolote-4 of Luhansk region, OHCHR documented cases of military use of civilian property without the provision of compensation, nor alternative housing to the owners. Military units do not conclude lease agreements with civilian owners in a regular and systematic manner, despite a legislative requirement to do so.28 Even when prompted or justified by imperative military necessity, lease agreements are necessary to guarantee owners access to compensation for the use of their property. 36. In the village of Bezymenne (territory controlled by ‘Donetsk people’s republic’), OHCHR received allegations of the continued military use of a civilian property, after armed 25 26 27 28 12 All cases are represented in courts by national NGO Right to Protection. Judicial proceeding No. 265/6582/16. ICRC, Customary International Humanitarian Law Database, Rule 52. This rule is applicable to both international armed conflicts and non-international armed conflicts. Ministry of Defence Order No. 380 adopted in July 2018, requires military units to sign an official lease agreement with the owner for the use of civilian homes, available at https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z1020-18.