“FIGHT FOR LIFE” WEBSITE

About us

About us

Restoring Justice in Ukraine’s Criminal Justice System

For more than sixteen years, Ukraine has effectively lacked a functioning mechanism for correcting serious judicial errors in criminal cases. People sentenced to the harshest punishments — particularly life imprisonment, and previously even the death penalty — have been left without a real opportunity to have their convictions meaningfully reviewed.

This situation affects one of the most vulnerable and, at the same time, most marginalized groups within the prison population.

Many of these individuals were convicted by regional courts (now appellate courts) acting as trial courts. In practice, they were denied a genuine right to appeal — meaning they never received a full review of their cases on the merits by a higher court. Their sentences were imposed under the Criminal Procedure Code of 1961, a legal framework rooted in a punitive philosophy and applied amid widespread and systemic human rights violations.

What We Have Documented

We document the stories of people sentenced to life imprisonment who have never had real access to a fair review of their convictions.

In many of the cases we have studied, the prosecution’s evidence relied primarily on confessions obtained under pressure or torture — confessions later retracted in court. At the same time:

• evidence presented by the defense was ignored or dismissed;
• arguments pointing to innocence or lesser culpability were not examined;
• investigators and judges failed to assess contradictions in the case files.

As a result, people continue to serve sentences that may be deeply unjust, losing decades of their lives in isolation.

One sentence can erase a lifetime.
And without review, injustice becomes permanent.

Systemic Failure, Not Mistakes

In most democratic societies, there are clear procedures for reviewing criminal judgments when reasonable doubts arise regarding their legality or fairness.

In Ukraine, however, many convictions we have examined reveal patterns of systemic failure, rather than isolated judicial errors. Case materials show disturbing indicators of intentional official misconduct, including:

• the use of torture to extract confessions;
• falsification of evidence;
• knowingly unjust court decisions.

Despite Ukraine’s declared commitment to democracy and the rule of law, the acquittal rate in criminal cases remains below one percent, according to official judicial statistics. In Europe and the United States, this figure is several times higher.

Such disparity is not accidental.
It is a warning sign of deep structural failure.

When a Sentence Begins With a Lie

We document the stories of people sentenced to life imprisonment who have never had real access to a fair review of their convictions. These are not abstract numbers. These are human lives.

A Real Case: 27 Years Behind Bars

In 2026, Yaroslav Mysyak will turn 52 years old.
Nearly half of his life — 27 years — has been spent behind bars for a crime he did not commit.

In 1999, Yaroslav was sentenced to death for the murder of his grandparents and uncle. That sentence was later commuted to life imprisonment.

Born on August 4, 1974, into a Christian family in western Ukraine, Yaroslav dedicated his life to serving God. He received formal theological education and led youth ministry in the Zakarpattia region. At the time of his arrest, he was married and the father of a two-year-old daughter.

A Conviction Without Evidence

On October 18, 1999, the Zakarpattia Regional Court sentenced Yaroslav to death.

There was no reliable evidence of guilt — only a confession obtained under coercion.

Investigators threatened harm to Yaroslav’s wife and young daughter. Under that pressure, he signed a so-called “confession,” later retracted. At the same time:

• his alibi was never properly examined by the court;
• forensic conclusions contradicted the actual circumstances of the crime;
• the case file shows clear signs of fabricated evidence;
• an independent forensic analysis commissioned by the defense refuted the prosecution’s key claims.

Investigators also ignored testimony pointing to other possible perpetrators — men seen intoxicated near the crime scene, carrying weapons consistent with those used in the murders.

Fear replaced the search for truth.